HQ 


UC-NRLF 


•SOJJT 


A  Study  of  Family  Desertion 


By 


EARLE  EDWARD  EUBANK,  Ph.  D. 

(University  of  Chicago) 


Published  by 

THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  PUBLIC  WELFARE 

CITY  OF  CHICAGO 

1916. 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  Page 

I.     INTRODUCTION 1 

The  Family  as  a  Subject  for  Scientific  Study 1 

Desertion  a  Phenomenon  common  to  the  Family 2 

Desertion  common  to  all  parts  of  the  world. 2 

Desertion   manifested   in    all   periods   of  history 3 

Sources   of  Material 5 

II.     ANALYSIS    OF    THE     PROBLEM 9 

Desertion  a  Problem  of  the  City 9 

Desertion  more  frequently  Manifested  in  the  Husband 14 

Desertion  not  a  Racial  Phenomenon 15 

Desertion  not  a  Phenomenon  of  Religion  or  Sect 17 

Desertion   as   "the   Poor   Man's   Divorce" 17 

Desertion  not  Primarily  due  to  Economic  Conditions 20 

III.  EXTENT    OF    DESERTION 22 

Incompleteness  of  Statistical  Data  on  Desertion   22 

Statistics   on   Desertion 22 

IV.  SOCIAL    SIGNIFICANCE    OF    DESERTION* 27 

Effects  upon  the  Family 27 

Demoralization  of  its  members 28 

Relief  from  the  burden  of  an  unhappy  family  life 31 

Effects  upon  Society  32 

Financial  cost  32 

Moral  cost  35 

V.     DESERTION    TYPES    37 

Analysis  by  Types  as  a  Method  of  Study 37 

The   spurious  deserter 37 

The  gradual  deserter 38 

The    "intermittent   husband" 41 

The  ill-advised  marriage  type 45 

The   "last   resort"   type 47 

The  Vanished  Husband   49 

The  Reclaimable  versus  the  Irreclaimable  Deserter 49 

VI.     TREATMENT    OF    DESERTION 51 

Phases  of  Treatment 51 

With  reference  to  the  deserter 51 

With  reference  to  the  abandoned  family 60 

VII.     SUMMARY    AND    CONCLUSION ... 64 

A   Suggested   Policy  of  Treatment 64 

BIBLIOGRAPHY     .  69 


"If  the  family,  or  rather  the  home,  is  in  any  considerable 
degree  to  social  science  what  the  atom  is  to  physics  and  the  cell 
is  to  biology,  it  is  almost  inevitable  that  social  science  must  fol- 
low the  method  of  those  sciences  so  far  at  least  as  to  concen- 
trate attention  on  its  study  and  discover  that  the  home  contains 
within  it  the  great  secret  of  all  the  social  sciences.  Indeed  if 
this  be  true,  the  problems  of  the  several  social  sciences  them- 
selves depend  on  this  work  for  the  home.  Especially  is  it  true 
of  the  problems  of  government,  economics,  religion  and  ped- 
agogy, that  they  all  need  a  scientific  knowledge  of  the  home  as 
an  indispensable  condition  of  their  solution." — S.  W.  Dike, 
"The  Problem  of  the  Family,"  Congress  of  Arts  and  Sciences, 
1904,  VII,  721. 


CHAPTER   I. 

Introduction 

1— THE   FAMILY  AS  A   SUBJECT  FOR  SCIENTIFIC   STUDY. 

Today,  as  truly  as  in  times  past,  the  family  is  the  "principal  social  factor" 
in  the  life  of  man.  Within  it  are  combined  activities  which  have  as  their  end 
"the  one  general  fnncton  of  preserving  the  physical  and  psychical  continuity 
of  the  race."1  It  is  thus  a  biological  fact  before  it  becomes,  with  the  sanction  of 
formal  marriage,  a  social  institution. 

Although  the  family  is  the  most  ancient  of  social  organizations  it  is  one  of 
the  latest  to  be  made  the  subject  of  scientific  analysis  and  investigation.  It  has 
escaped  until  recent  years  the  searching  inquiries  which  science  is  accustomed 
to  make  into  physical  phenomena.  Whether  this  has  been  due  to  its  very  near- 
ness, which  has  caused  it  to  be  overlooked  as  a  subject  for  study,  or  to  its  inti- 
mate and  tender  associations  which  make  scientific  investigations  seem  akin  to 
sacrilege,  or  whether  the  state  of  public  opinion  has  been  responsible  for  a  re- 
luctance to  meddle  with  the  delicate  questions  which  its  relations  involve,  it  has 
until  lately  been  comparatively  immune  from  analysis  and  criticism.1 

As  recently  as  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago  Dr.  S.  W.  Dike  felt  the  importance 
of  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  family  as  an  institution  was  at  that  time 
scarcely  recognized. 

"It  is  not  easy  to  find  the  term  'family'  in  national  or  state  constitutions. 
It  is  by  no  means  frequent  on  our  statute  books.  Indeed  the  title  has  found 
is  way  into  the  encyclopedias  only  in  recent  years.  We  have  come  at  the 
family  in  fragments  and  legislated  accordingly.  Our  ideas  of  it  are  ex- 
tremely individualistic,  and  so  we  are  dominated  by  the  conception  of  mar- 
riage as  a  mere  contract,  with  little  thought  of  the  family  and  relations  of 
status."  3 

Even  those  important  writers  who  touched  upon  the  subject  of  the  family 
did  not  undertake  to  consider  it  in  its  modern  aspects  nor  in  any  relation  to  cur- 
rent problems.  As  early  as  1851  Sir  Henry  Maine  and  Bachofen  had  written  of 
the  family.  Later  came  the  works  of  Spencer,  Morgan,  Lubbock,  McLennan, 
Hearn,  Lyall,  de  Coulanges,  Starcke,  Westermarck  and  others,  but 

"all  these  dealt  more  or  less  directly  with  the  family  but  in  ancient  or 
early  types  of  society.  Still  there  was  no  study  of  the  family  in  any  of  our 
higher  educational  institutions.  There  was  no  book  on  the  family  in  the 
English  language  prior  to  1880."* 

It  has  been  left  almpst  to  our  own  generation  to  discover  the  significance  of 
the  family  as  a  icliole,  and  to  consider  it  in  its  vital  relations  to  law,  education, 
economics  and  morality.  That  the  past  two  or  three  decades  have  seen  a 
marked  change  in  the  popular  attitude  toward  the  family  is  due,  partly  at  least, 
to  the  fact  that  the  machinery  of  family  life  does  not  seem  of  late  years  to  be 
working  as  smoothly  as  it  should.5 


1.  Small  and  Vincc-nt,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Society,  p.  250. 

2.  W.   Goodsell,    The  Family  as  a  Social  and  Educational  Institution,  p.    2. 

3.  S.    W.    Dike,    "Problems   of    the    Family,"    Century    Maf/ozine.    XXXIX    (1889), 
393. 

4.  S.    TV.    Dike,    "The    Problem    of    the    Family,"    Congress    of    Arts    and    Sciences, 
1904.   VII.    712. 

"It  is  mainly  in  recent  years  that  the  family  as  an  institution  has  attracted 
the  attention  of  the  thinker  and  historian.  It  is  so  intimate  a  part  of  life,  so  inseparable 
from  existence  in  all  normal  communities,  that,  like  the  air  we  breathe,  it  eludes 
observation,  and  \ve  only  notice  it  when  something  goes  wrong."  Helen  Bosanquet, 
The  Family,  p.  7. 


2  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

"The  increase  almost  everywhere  throughout  the  civilized  world  of  the 
rate  of  divorce  and  the  immense  volume  of  it  in  the  United  States,  the  de- 
crease of  the  marriage  rate,  and  the  postponement  of  marriage,  the  preva- 
lence of  unchastity  and  the  lightness  with  which  its  offenses  are  regarded, 
the  decrease  of  the  birth-rate  among  those  best  fitted  by  their  own  training 
and  resources  to  rear  large  families,  the  growing  self-assertion  of  youth,  and 
the  lessened  power  of  the  home  over  character,  have  combined  to  bring  the 
family  to  the  front  as  one  of  the  most  vital  subjects  for  practical  considera- 
tion." * 

The  significance  of  manifestations  such  as  the  ones  mentioned  lies  in  the 
fact  that  they  are  (indicative  of  important  changes  which  the  nature  of  the 
family  is  experiencing.  Whether  we  approve  or  not,  we  are  continually  being 
made  aware  that  under  the  influence  of  changing  social  and  economic  conditions 
the  character  of  the  family  is  undergoing  a  marked  modification.  In  many  ways 
a  process  of  disintegration  is  going  on  and  the  cohesive  elements  in  its  struc- 
ture are  becoming  less  powerful.  The  stability  of  the  home  seems  to  be  less 
than  it  has  been  in  the  past,  and  the  result,  in  many  instances,  is  the  complete 
breaking  down  of  the  family  itself. 

This  latter  day  tendency  toward  family  disintegration  is  not  merely  an  in- 
teresting fact.  A  large  importance  lies  in  the  intimate  relation  of  the  family  to 
other  social  institutions  and  phenomena.  Any  alteration  in  the  family  must  of 
necessity  profoundly  affect  them. 

"The  relation  of  the  home  as  a  social  unity,  to  poverty,  crime,  intem- 
perance and  other  vice,  is  worthy  of  the  search  of  the  statistician  under  the 
direction  of  social  science.  The  composition  of  the  family,  its  housing,  its 
relation  to  the  industry  of  its  members  and  society,  its  influence  in  supply- 
ing the  saloon,  the  brothel,  the  almshouse  and  the  prison  with  victims,  or  in 
resisting  the  allurements  of  these  places  of  vice,  as  well  as  its  own  suf- 
ferings from  them,  are  subjects  of  pressing  importance."  2 

Family  desertion  is  one  of  the  ways  in  which  the  dissolution  of  the  bonds 
which  unite  the  members  of  the  family  manifests  itself.  Like  divorce,  it  is  a 
problem  of  the  disintegration  of  the  family.  When  it  occurs  the  physical  union 
which  is  the  biological  basis  of  marriage  is  terminated;  the  economic  organiza- 
tion of  the  family  whereby  it  normally  maintains  itself  as  an  independent  group 
Is  disturbed,  and  readjustment  is  necessitated  for  the  provision  of  those  who  are 
left  without  support;  the  ties  of  affection  and  sentiment  which  have  given 
greatest  strength  and  most  complete  unity  to  the  family  group  are  broken  down. 

In  the  United  States  especially  desertion  is  increasingly  forcing  itself  upon 
public  attention.  The  object  of  the  present  monograph  is  to  analyze  the  con- 
ditions out  of  which  it  arises  and  if  possible  to  discern  the  causes.  Desertion  is 
to  be  considered  as  one  of  the  forms  of  family  disintegration.  What  is  its  extent? 
What  are  its  characteristics?  In  what  variety  of  ways  does  it  find  expres- 
sion? What  is  its  social  significance,  and  in  what  ways  does  it  appear  to  be  a 
complicating  factor  in  questions  of  dependency,  delinquency  and  immorality? 
What  measures  in  the  past  have  been  employed  in  dealing  with  it?  What  prac- 
tical conclusions  may  be  deduced  concerning  its  social  treatment?  These  are 
some  of  the  outstanding  matters  which  will  be  considered. 


2— DESERTION  A  PHENOMENON  COMMON  TO  THE  FAMILY. 

A. — Desertion  Common  to  all  Parts  of  the  World. 

The  desertion  of  families  is  not  a  manifestation  peculiar  to  American  society. 
Eighteen  countries  besides  our  own  have  specifically  recognized  its  existence 


1.  S.  W.  Dike,  "The  Problems  of  the  Family,"  Congress  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  1904, 
VII,   709. 

2.  S.  W.  Dike,  "Problems  of  the  Family."  Century  Magazine,  XXXIX   (1889),  386. 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

to  the  extent  of  making  it  a  ground  for  divorce.    In  five  others  it  is  accepted  as 
a  ground  for  legal  separation.1 

Nor  is  desertion  confined  to  civilized  society.  We  are  told  by  missionaries 
and  others  who  have  lived  with  primitive  peoples  that  it  is  not  an  uncommon  oc- 
currence among  them.- 

B — Desertion  Manifested  in  all  Periods  of  History. 

Neither  is  desertion  a  manifestation  peculiar  to  present  day  society.  It's 
presence  has  long  been  recognized  even  though  it  has  not;  been  studied. 

As  early  as  1685  desertion  began  to  be  recognized  as  a  problem  in  the 
American  colonies,  and  the  record  of  Rhode  Island  and  Providence  Plantations 
contains  the  following  language: 

"Whereas  severall  complaints  have  been  made  to  the  Generall  Assem- 
bly of  this  Colony  by  several  women  concerning  their  husbands  deserting 
them  and  so  absenting  themselves,  not  only  to  neglect  providing  for  them, 
but  also  they  cannot  be  heard  from,  which  matters  if  not  timely  prevented, 
may  give  occasions  for  persons  to  break  forth  to  the  committing  of  folly, 
who  otherwise  might  live  honestly  amongst  their  neighbors:  for  the  pre- 
venting of  such  miscarriages  let  it  be  enacted  by  this  Assembly  and  by  the 
authority  thereof,  that  if  either  husband  or  wife  have  or  shall  so  desert 
their  husband  or  wife,  that  they  cannot  be  heard  of  in  five  years'  time  after 
their  departure  of  said  husband  or  wife,  the  said  husband  or  wife  shall  be 
free  from  their  said  husband  or  wife.  Only  it  is  provided,  that  foreasmuch 
as  a  negative  cannot  otherwise  be  made  to  appear,  therefore  the  person,  be 
it  husband  or  wife  that  expects  relief,  shall  positively  give  their  engage- 
ment, together  with  the  circumstances  agreeing  before  a  Court,  that  they 
have  not  heard  from  their  said  husband  or  wife  so  absenting  themselves 
five  years'  time  as  aforesaid,  whereupon  the  absent  party  shall  be  deemed 
as  dead,  and  therefore  the  grieved  party  be  released;  anything  to  the  con- 
trary in  any  wise,  notwithstanding. 

John  Greene,  Clerke, 
Oct.  30,  1685.  per  John  Sanford,  Recorder."  • 

That  the  mother  country  had  recognized  this  as  a  national  question  long 
before  is  shown  by  her  Poor  Laws  of  1609: 

"And  for  that  many  wilful  people,  finding  that  they  have  children, 
have  some  hope  to  have  relief  from  the  parish  wherein  they  dwell,  and 
being  able  to  labour,  and  thereby  to  relieve  themselves  and  their  families, 
do  nevertheless  run  away  out  of  their  parishes  and  leave  their  families  upon 
the  parish;  (2)  for  remedy  whereof,  be  it  further  enacted  by  this  present 
parliament,  and  authority  of  the  same,  That  all  such  persons  so  running 
away  shall  be  deemed  to  incorrigible  rogues:  (3)  and  if  either  such  man  or 
woman,  being  able  to  work,  and  shall  threaten  to  run  away  and  leave  their 


1.  Countries  ichere  desertion  is  ground  for  divorce:     Argentine  Republic;  Australia 
(Victoria  and  New  South  Wales  only)  ;  Austria;  Bulgaria;   Denmark;   France   ("injures 
graves"   in   the   French   law  is  interpreted   to   cover  wilful   desertion.      Vide,   E.   Glasson, 
"Divorce,"   Le   grande   encyclopedic,   XIV.    757);    Germany;    Greec« ;    Hungary    (includ- 
ing Croatia  and   Slavonia)  ;    Japan;    Netherlands;    New   Zealand;    Norway;    Russia    Cm 
Finland,  and  for  Lutherans  in  Russia  proper)  ;   Scot'and  ;   Servia  ;   Sweden;   Switzerland. 

Countries  where  desertion  is  ground  for  legal  separation:  Canada  (Ontario.  New 
Brunswick,  Manitoba,  British  Columbia.  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Quebec)  ;  England 
and  Wales  ;  Ireland  ;  Italy  ;  Mexico. 

(This  statement  compiled  from  U.  S.  Special  Census  Report:  Marriage  and  Divorce, 
1867-1906,  I,  and  from  Hyacinthe  Ringrose,  Marriage  and  Divorce  Laws  of  the  World.) 

2.  Among   primitives,    however,    it    is    usually    the   woman    who   deserts,    driven    by 
desire  to  escape  from  the  toil  or  abuse  imposed  on  her  by  the  man.     The  husband  does 
not  desert   because   the   woman's  ability   to  work   and   to   bear  children   is   an   economic 
asset  from  which  he  does  not  desire  to  run  away.     If  she  is  no  longer  valuab'e  to  him 
in  these  ways,  or  if  he  wearies  of  her,  primitive  law  and  custom  permit  him  to  divorce 
her. 

In  early  society  in  general  the  right  of  divorce  was  given  to  man  before  it  was 
conceded  to  woman.  For  this  reason  divorce  was  then  more  commonly  the  husband's 
method  of  obtaining  release  if  it  was  desired,  and  desertion  that  of  the  wife. 

3.  Records   of    the    Colony    of   Rhode   Island   and    Providence    Plantat:ons    in    Xew 
England,  1678-1706,  III,   181-82.     Edited   (1858)   by  John  Russell   Bartlett,   Secretary  of 
State. 


\ 


*y  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

families  as  aforesaid,  the  same  being  proved  by  two  sufficient  witnesses 
upon  oath,  before  two  justices  of  peace  in  that  division;  that  the  said  per- 
sons so  threatening  shall  by  the  said  justices  of  peace  be  sent  to  the  houses 
of  correction,  (unless  he  or  she  can  put  in  sufficient  sureties  for  the  dis- 
charge of  the  parish)  there  to  be  dealt  with  and  detained  as  a  sturdy  and 
wandering  rogue,  and  to  be  delivered  at  the  said  assembly  or  meeting,  or 
at  the  quarter-sessions,  and  not  otherwise." * 

But  desertion,  and  laws  against  desertion,  were  in  existence  long  before  our 
era,  as  is  revealed  by  an  examination  of  the  great  legislative  codes  of  the 
ancient  world. 

The  Sacred  Laws  of  the  Aryas,  at  least  two  or  three  and  possibly  six  cen- 
turies before  the  Christian  era,  were  specific  on  the  point.  In  Apastam'ba's 
Aphorisms  on  the  Sacred  Law  we  read: 

"He  who  has  unjustly  forsaken  his  wife  shall  put  on  an  ass's   skin, 

with  the  hair  turned  outside,  and  beg  in  seven  houses  saying  'Give  alms  to 

him  who  forsook  his  wife.'     That  shall  be  his  livelihood  for  six  months. 
"But  if  a  wife  forsakes  her  husband  she  shall  perform  the  twelve-night 

Krikkhra  penance  for  as  long  a  time."  - 

Again,  in  the  Institutes  of  Vishnu: 

"(Abandoning)  one's  holy  fire,  or  one's  father,  mother,  son  or  wife 
*  *  *  such  criminals  in  the  fourth  degree  shall  perform  the  Kandrayana 
or  Paraka  penances,  or  shall  sacrifice  a  cow  (as  the  case  may  require)."3 

Again,  in  the  Vasistha  Dharmdsastra: 

"A  wife  (though)  tainted  by  sin,  whether  she  be  quarrelsome  or  have 
left  a  house  or  have  suffered  criminal  force,  or  have  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
thieves,  must  not  be  abandoned;  to  forsake  her  is  not  prescribed  (by  sacred 
law)."4 

Again,  in  the  Laws  of  Manu: 

"To  a  Bramana  (householder),  or  to  an  ascetic  who  comes  for  food,  he 
may  with  the  permission  of  (his)  Bramana  (guests),  show  honor  according 
to  his  ability. 

"Let  him  mix  all  kinds  of  food  together,  sprinkle  them  with  water,  and 
put  them,  scattering  them  (on  Kusa  grass),  down  on  the  ground  in  front  of 
(his  guests),  when  they  have  finished  the  meal. 

"The  remnant  (in  the  dishes),  and  the  portion  scattered  on  Kusa  grass, 
shall  be  the  share  of  deceased  (children)  who  receive  not  the  sacrament 
(of  cremation)  and  of  those  who  (unjustly)  forsook  noble  wives."5 

Once  more,  from  the  Minor  Law  Books: 

"Those  must  not  be  examined  as  witnesses  who  are  interested  in  the 
suit,  nor  friends,  nor  associates,  nor  enemies,  nor  notorious  offenders,  nor 
persons  tainted  (with  a  heavy  sin),  *  *  *  nor  an  atheist,  nor  a  Vratya, 
nor  one  who  has  forsaken  his  wife  or  his  fire."  ° 

Most  ancient  of  all  recorded  legislation  in  this  field  is  that  of  Hammurabi, 
King  of  Babylon,  who,  approximately  2250  B.  C.  found  this  a  sufficiently  exten- 
sive evil  to  warrant  a  decree  to  the  effect  that  a  deserted  wife  might  have  the 
right  to  remarry: 


1.  The  7 tli  James  1st  Cap.  4,  Sec.  8,  as  published  in  the  English  Statutes  at  Large, 
VII,  225-26.     Edited  by  Danby  Pickering. 

2.  The  Sacred  Books  of  the  East,  II,  89,  Sees.  19  and  20.     Edited  by  F.  Max  Milller. 
(Translation  by  Georg.  Biihler. ) 

3.  Ibid.,  VII,   135,   138.  Sees.   6  and  35.      (Translation  by  Julius  Jolly.) 

4.  Ibid.,  XIV,    133,    Sees.    2   and    3. 

">.  Ibid..  XXV,  120,  Sees.  243,  244  and  245.  (Translated  by  Georg.  Buhler.) 
6.  Ibid.,  XXXIII,  86-87,  Sees.  177  and  180.  (Translation  by  Julius  Jolly.)  In 
this  same  category  of  those  who  must  not  be  allowed  to  serve  as  witnesses  in  'a  trial, 
included  with  wife  deserters  are  such  persons  as  these:  Slaves,  imposters,  drunken 
men.  madnn-n.  eunuchs,  poisoners,  weather-prophets,  malicious  persons,  betrayers  of 
friends,  forgers,  quacks,  etc. 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

"If  a  man  desert  his  city  and  flee  and  afterward  his  wife  enter  into 
another  house;  if  that  man  return  and  would  take  his  wife,  the  wife  of  the 
fugitive  shall  not  return  because  he  hated  his  city  and  fled."  x 

Although  the  rate  of  desertion  will  vary  from  time  to  time  and  from  place 
to  place  its  extensiveness  and  persistence  as  indicated  in  the  foregoing  rec- 
ords lead  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  a  well  nigh  universal  phenomenon.  It 
indicates  that  desertion  is  as  old  as  the  family  and  co-extensive  with  it,  and  that 
it  springs  out  of  its  very  nature,  from  the  friction  and  conflict  of  opinions  and 
interests  inevitably  engendered  in  the  intimacy  of  the  family  relation  itself. 

3— SOURCES  OF  MATERIAL. 

The  sources  of  information  for  the  study  of  desertion  are  very  meagre. 

Only  of  late  has  there  been  the  possibility  of  studying  any  phase  of  the 
family  scientifically  on  an  extensive  scale.  Before  the  introduction  of  a  system 
of  social  statistics — a  step  taken  almost  within  our  memory — it  was  impossible 
for  a  community  to  investigate  disinterestedly  and  over  a  wide  area  the  con- 
ditions and  modifications  of  family  life.-  Until  recent  years  we  have  been  dis- 
posed to  regard  the  union  of  man  and  wife  as  a  matter  of  private  contract,  and 
consequently  have  dealt  with  the  individuals  composing  the  family  on  an  in- 
dividualistic basis. 

The  first. serious  attempt  in  this  country  to  study  the  relations  of  the  family 
on  a  large  scale  was  made  by  Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  Commissioner  of  Labor. 
In  1889  under  his  direction  appeared  A  Report  on  Marriage  and  Divorce  in  the 
United  States.  J867-'Sf>.  Two  decades  later  appeared  A  Special  Report  on  Mar- 
riage and  Divorce.  J861-1906.  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census,  S.  N.  D.  North, 
Director,  which  in  addition  to  its  own,  incorporated  the  findings  of  the  former 
report. 

Much  of  the  interest  in  the  institution  of  the  family  now  general  throughout 
the  country  may  be  directly  traced  to  the  startling  disclosures  as  to  the  rapid 
increase  of  divorce  made  by  these  reports.  Since  then  a  flood  of  literature 
which  increases  daily  has  been  produced  dealing  with  the  family,  and  particu- 
larly with  the  matter  of  divorce. 

The  interest  in  family  desertion  is  of  more  recent  date.  Until  recent  years 
it  has  not  presented  itself  to  students  of  social  life  as  a  problem  that  could  be 
isolated,  and  so  dealt  with  and  studjed  as  a  phenomenon  distinct  from  divorce 
and  legal  separation  for  which  it  is  so  frequently  offered  as  a  ground. 

The  scanty  information  we  possess  has  been  secured  primarily  through 
charity  organization  societies  and  professional  social  workers.  The  work  of  or- 
ganized charity  is  essentially  with  the  institution  of  the  family  and  with  the  in- 
dividual as  a  member  of  a  family.  "Family  rehabilitation"  is  the  familiar  term 
descriptive  of  the  task  of  the  charity  worker.  Where  rehabilitation  does  not 
seem  possible  or  where  the  family  cannot  furnish  the  special  type  of  care  that 
is  required  special  institutions  are  provided  to  take  the  place  of  the  family.  Al- 
though the  charities  may  not  fully  have  recognized  the  fact  in  the  past,  and 
perhaps  it  is  not  yet  generally  recognized  by  the  public,  it  is  nevertheless  true 
that  the  family  is  the  starting  point  for  practically  every  measure  of  social  re- 
adjustment." 


1.  The  Code  of  Hammurabi,  Sec.   136.     Harper's  translation,   p.    47. 

2.  Vide,  W.   D.  Morrison,  Crime  and  Its  Causes.  Chap.   1. 

3.  "In   philanthropy   we   note   a    steadily   growing   recognition   of   the   place   of   the 
home    in    social    reform.      The    charitable    insf'tution    where    large    numbers    of    children 
have  been  gathered  for  care  has  given  place  to  the  single  home.     For  it  has  been  found 
that  the  average  home  available   for  the  care  of  destitute  children   is  a   more  natural, 
and,   therefore,  a  better  place  for  the  training  of  the  chi'd  than   the  artificial   life  ofta 
great  caravansary.     Poor  relief  is  abandon'ng  its  former  habit  of  relianc"  on  the  alms- 
house  and  the  gift  of  money.     It  now  seeks  to  keep  the  family  together  and  to  put  the 
home   on    its  own   feet  and   to   leave   it    to   self-support.      The  "use   of   social   settlements 
in   our  cities   tends  strongly   in   the   same   direction.      Indeed,    it   is   almost   a    first   prin- 
ciple of  all  expert  charitable  work  now  to  make  respect  for  the  home  and  all  possible 
use  of  its  resources  a  cardinal  principle  of  all  philanthropic  effort."      S.  W.   Dike,   "The 
Problem  of  the  Family,"  Congress  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  1904,  VII.   714-15. 


6  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

it 

Therefore  it  is  to  be  expected  that  the  facts  concerning  desertion  should 
first  of  all  attract  attention  and  stimulate  inquiry  among  those  practically  en- 
gaged in  social  welfare  work.  Among  these  the  general  opinion  seems  to  pre- 
vail that  desertion  is  increasing — this  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  every  state  of 
the  union  has  made  desertion  or  non-support  a  criminal  offense.1 

"Of  the  replies  received  to  the  question  addressed  to  many  charitable 
and  humane  societies  throughout  the  country  as  to  whether  the  evil  (deser- 
tion) was  decreasing  or  increasing,  nine  per  cent  declare  that  it  is  decreas- 
ing, twenty-seven  per  cent  think  it  is  stationary,  while  sixty-four  per  cent 
declare  that  it  is  increasing."  - 

Possibly  it  is  this  general  impression  that  has  led  certain  charities  in  re- 
cent years,  particularly  since  1900,  to  make  a  more  clearly  defined  effort  to  un- 
derstand desertion.  A  catalog  of  all  definite  studies  in  the  field,  however,  is  not 
extensive. 

In  1901  appeared  the  first,  Miss  Zilpha  D.  Smith's  Deserted  Wives  and  De- 
serting Husbands:  a  study  of  23'f  families  based  on  the  experience  of  the  dis- 
trict committees  and  agents  of  the  Associated  Charities  of  Boston.  This  was 
prepared  from  one  year's  record  of  cases  while  Miss  Smith  was  General  Secre- 
tary of  the  Boston  organization. 

This  was  followed  in  1902  by  a  study  by  a  special  committee  appointed  for 
the  purpose,  of  211  cases  which  came  under  the  care  of  the  Philadelphia  So- 
ciety for  Organizing  Charity  during  that  year. 

In  1905  was  published  Miss  Lillian  Brandt's  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four 
Deserters  and  their  Families:  a  descriptive  study  of  their  characteristics  and 
circumstances.  This  differed  from  the  former  two  in  that  it  was  not  confined 
to  the  study  of  local  cases,  but  was  based  on  information  obtained  from  twenty- 
six  organizations  in  fifteen  states. 

Desertion  has  been  a  topic  of  discussion  at  four  of  the  annual  meetings  of 
the  National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Corrections:  1902,  1905,  1911  and  1912. 
At  the  second  of  these  a  report  of  a  special  committee,  with  resolutions,  was 
adopted  by  the  body. 

The  National  Conference  of  Catholic  Charities  has  had  the  subject  under 
formal  consideration  once:  in  1912. 

The  most  practical  consideration  that  the  matter  has  received  has  been  at 
the  hands  of  the  National  Conference  of  Jewish  Charities.  Special  committees 
appointed  reported  with  specific  recommendations  at  the  meetings  of  the  Con- 
ference in  1900  and  1906.  In  1910  it  was  again  taken  up,  this  time  being  made 
the  chief  topic  of  treatment  by  'the  Conference.  The  establishment  of  the  Na- 
tional Desertion  Bureau  February  1,  1911,  with  headquarters  at  New  York  City, 
was  the  outgrowth  of  this.  The  Bureau  has  published  two  valuable  reports,  the 
first  in  April,  1912,  the  second  in  November,  1915. 

Desertion  has  been  under  consideration  nineteen  times  by  various  state 
conferences  of  Charities  and  Correction. 

Abroad  the  question  has  been  made  the  subject  of  special  study  in  the  city 
of  Glasgow,  Scotland.  It  has  been  treated  in  a  series  of  four  pamphlets  by  Mr. 
James  R.  Motion,  Inspector  of  the  Poor  and  Clerk  to  the  Parish  Council  of 
Glasgow,  under  dates  of  June,  1909,  October,  1909,  June,  1912,  and  February, 
1913. 

In  addition  to  these  sources  of  information,  all  of  which  have  originated 
with  charitable  societies  or  conferences,  is  the  special  report  of  the  Federal 
Census  Office,  already  mentioned:  Marriage  and  Divorce,  1867-1906.  In  this 
report  are  contained  the  only  extensive  statistics  -on  desertion  which  have  been 
compiled  in  this  country.  Because  they  are  the  most  comprehensive  figures 
available  reference  will  be  made  to  them  in  the  papes  to  follow.  For  several 
reasons,  however,  they  cannot  be  accepted  at  face  value: 

1.  Vide,  Win.  H.  Baldwin,  "The  Present  Status  of  Family  Desertion  and  Non- 
support  Laws,"  p.  2.  Abstract  appears  in  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference  of 
Charities  and  Correction,  1911,  p.  406. 

•2.     Wm.   H.  Baldwin,  op.  cit. 


INTRODUCTION.  •  7 

i.  They  are  incomplete.  They  cover  only  thpse  desertions  where  divorce 
action  was  taken  in  which  desertion  was  given  as  the  ground.  Consequently  no 
record  is  included  of  the  vast  number  of  desertions  which  have  taken  place  with 
no  attempt  made  to  secure  divorce. 

ii.  They  contain  variations  which  may  "be  due  to  other  things  than  actual 
fluctuation  in  the  desertion  rate.1  (a)  These  may  be  due  to  difference  in  state 
laws.  New  York,  for  example,  shows  an  extremely  low  percentage  of  desertion, 
because  desertion  is  not  admitted  as  a  ground  of  divorce  in  that  state.  Other 
states  having  liberal  laws  attract  a  population  which  comes  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  securing  divorce,  and  so  have  recorded  a  higher  divorce  rate  than  is 
properly  theirs.  Nevada  is  an  example,  (b)  The  existence  of  customs,  tradi- 
tions or  ethical  standards  opposed  to  desertion  will  make  for  a  lower  rate,  (c) 
Divorce  will  be  lower  where  there  is  a  large  Roman  Catholic  population  because 
their  church  forbids  divorce  for  any  cause,  desertion  included,  (d)  The  deser- 
tion rate  will  be  affected  by  unequal  distribution  of  ethnic  stocks  due  to  immi- 
gration, which  affects  the  divorce  rate. 

iii.  They  may  not  always  be  statistics  of  l>ona  fide  desertions.  The 
author  of  the  article  on  "Divorce"  in  the  New  International  Encyclopedia  calls 
attention  to  a  fact  which  is  common  knowledge  in  divorce  courts,  viz.,  that  de- 
sertion is  the  most  easily  and  commonly  abused  of  all  grounds  for  divorce. 
Couples  wishing  to  be  released  from  matrimonial  bonds  in  casting  about  for  the 
most  "respectable"  ground  upon  which  to  base  their  petition  frequently  decide 
upon  desertion.  By  collusion  an  apparent  desertion  may  be  affected  which  in 
reality  does  not  exist,  or  which  exists  for  the  sole  purpose  of  creating  a  techni- 
cal case  for  the  plaintiff.  What  the  Federal  statistics  reveal,  then,  is  not  neces- 
sarily the  number  of  times  desertion  has  been  a  cause  for  divorce,  but  the  num- 
ber of  times  it  has  been  alleged  and  accepted  as  a  legal  ground  for  divorce. 


The  studies  which  have  been  mentioned,  together  with  special  papers  which 
have  been  published  from  time  to  time,  constitute  the  secondary  sources  of  the 
present  study. 

The  primary  sources  have  been  the  case  records  of  the  Chicago  Court  of 
Domestic  Relations,  and  concrete  cases  aided  by  the  United  Charities  of  Chi- 
cago. 

The  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  was  started  April  3,  1911,  as  a 
branch  of  the  Municipal  Court.  Its  business  is  to  try  all  cases  wherein  are  in- 
volved criminal  breaches  of  domestic  relations,  one  of  its  objects,  as  outlined 
originally  by  Judge  Charles  M.  Goodnow  is,  "to  inaugurate  a  system  whereby 
delinquent  deserters  may  be  promptly  compelled  to  support  their  wives  and 
children,  thus  forcing  the  one  upon  whom  that  obligation  rests  to  perform  that 
duty  and  to  relieve  the  charitable  public  of  another  burden."  2  The  court  has 
kept  an  individual  record  of  the  cases  brought  before  it,  and  from  these  327  de- 
sertions have  been  selected — those  being  chosen  whose  information  seemed 
most  complete — for  the  tabulation  of  statistical  data  concerning  some  of  the 
characteristics  of  desertion  in  general. 

Of  these  327.  two  hundred  are  cases  which  representatives  of  the  Juvenile 
Protective  Association  of  Chicago  have  personally  visited  and  studied.  The  ma- 
terial which  they  have  obtained  has  not  been  published,  and  it  is  through  the 
courtesy  of  that  organization  that  a  part  of  their  information  has  been  included 
in  some  of  the  tables  which  are  to  follow. 

An  intensive  study  has  been  made  of  the  cases  aided  by  the  United  Chari- 
ties of  Chicago.  From  the  files  of  the  Stock  Yards  District  of  this  society  more 
than  six  hundred  families  were  taken,  the  cases  which  have  come  to  their  atten- 
tion over  a  five  year  period.  All  of  these  have  been  visited  personally  by  the 
visitors  from  the  United  Charities;  many  of  them  have  been  visited  again  in 
particular  connection  with  this  study.  These  are  the  cases  which  have  fur- 


1.  Cf.,  J.  P.  Lichtenberger,  Divorce,  a  Study  in  Social  Causation,  Chap.  xiii. 

2.  From  a  statement  prepared  by  Mrs.  Gertrude  Howe  Britton,   Superintendent  of 
the  Juvenile  Protective  Association,  for  the  voters  of  Chicago,   Sept.   30,   1914. 


8  ,  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

nished  the  concrete  material  for  analysis.  From  them  has  been  made  the 
classification  of  desertion  types,  and  they  have  afforded  the  bulk  of  the  illustra- 
tive material  used.1 

In  an  attempt  to  get  statistical  material  from  as  wide  a  range  as  possible 
letters  were  sent  out  to  seventy  charity  organization  societies  of  the  leading 
cities  of  the  United  States  and  Canada,  distributed  among  thirty-eight  states 
and  three  provinces;  and  to  twenty-four  societies  of  fifteen  countries  abroad. 
Answers  have  been  received  from  thirty-two  American  and  six  foreign  societies. 
Letters  were  sent  also  to  twenty  Jewish  charity  organization  societies  of  the 
United  States;  to  the  divorce  courts  of  sixteen  of  the  larger  cities  of  the  coun- 
try; to  the  seven  courts  of  domestic  relations;  and  to  twelve  cities  known  to 
have  departments  of  public  outdoor  relief. 

In  an  attempt  to  locate  every  study  and  all  literature  to  which  the  subject 
has  given  rise  in  the  United  States  requests  for  co-operation — which  have  met 
with  cordial  response — were  sent  to  the  secretaries  of  the  National  Conference 
of  Charities  and  Correction,  and  the  thirty-three  state  conferences  of  Charities 
and  Correction;  to  The  Survey;  the  Russell  Sage  Foundation;  the  New  York 
School  of  Philanthropy;  The  National  Desertion  Bureau;  and  to  the  leading 
social  service  agencies  of  Chicago. 


1.  Charity  cases  have  been  selected  as  a  basis  for  this  study  primarily  because 
more  cases  are  available  among  them,  and  because  information  concerning'  them  is 
fuller  than  among  families  which  are  not  under  obligation  to  philanthropic  societies. 
Much  important  information  is  obtainable  from  the  record  of  the  society  before  going 
to  the  family  itself,  for  it  has  been  previously  recorded  as  part  of  the  regular  pro- 
cedure of  the  society  preliminary  to  giving  relief.  Being  known  personally,  as  these 
families  are,  to  regular  visitors  of  the  society,  information  can  be  gathered  from  these 
officials  in  addition  to  that  contained  in  the  records.  Finally,  deserted  families  which 
have  applied  for  charity  and  have  become  familiar  with  its  inquiries  are  less  apt  to  be 
suspicious  or  resentful  of  sympathetic  investigation  which  is  so  essent'al  to  a  study  of 
this  kind.  Whatever  conclusions  respecting  desertion  may  be  reached  in  the  following 
pages  are  therefore  based  mainly  upon  desertions  which  have  occurred  among  the 
dependent  c'asses,  or  among  those  whom  desertion  has  thrown  into  dependency,  and  not 
upon  cases  where  desertion  is  unaccompanied  by  dependency. 

These  latter  would  constitute  a  separate  problem,  and  possibly  some  of  the  con- 
clusions reached  here  would  not  apply  there.  At  the  present  writing  it  does  not  appear 
how  a  study  of  such  cases  would  be  undertaken,  nor  what  sources  of  material  would 
appea  r. 

In  the  words  of  Mr.  Win.  H.  Baldwin.  "The  interest  of  the  public  attaches  by  reason 
of  the  non-support,  rather  than  the  absence  in  the  case  of  family  desertion."  It  is  to 
rases  of  this  class  which  the  following  pages  particularly  devote  themselves. 


CHAPTER    II. 

Analysis  of  the  Problem. 

1— DESERTION   A   PROBLEM   OF  THE   CITY. 

Desertion  as  we  know  it,  and  insofar,  at  least,  as  it  has  been  studied,  is  a 
problem  of  the  city.  General  observation  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  more 
particularly  an  urban  than  a  rural  problem.  Exact  information  upon  this  point 
is  lacking,  yet  there  is  reason  for  the  assumption. 

As  desertion  is  the  most  popular  ground  for  divorce  in  the  United  States1 
we  are  justified  in  supposing  that  where  there  are  more  divorces  there  will  be 
also  more  desertions  included  in  the  number  except  in  those  states  which  do 
not  admit  desertion  as  a  legal  ground,  viz.,  New  York,  North  Carolina,  South 
Carolina  (which  does  not  grant  divorce  for  any  cause)  and  the  District  of 
Columbia.  That  divorce  rates  are  higher  in  the  city  than  in  the  country  is 
shown  to  be  highly  probable  by  the  tables  prepared  by  the  Federal  Census 
Office.  Excluding  states  having  counties  whose  records  were  lacking  or  in- 
complete, twenty-eight  states  remained,  including  the  District  of  Columbia, 
which  permitted  an  accurate  comparison  between  the  divorce  rate  for  city 
counties  and  other  counties.  The  conclusions  of  the  Census  Office,  based  upon 
the  tables,  are  expressed  in  the  following  words: 

"In  all  but  three  of  the  twenty-eight  states  shown  in  the  table,  the 
divorce  rate  in  1900  was  greater  in  the  city  counties  than  in  the  other  coun- 
ties. The  three  exceptions  were  New  York,  Pennsylvania  and  Oregon.  In 
New  Jersey.  Connecticut  and  Michigan,  the  excess  of  the  rate  in  the  city 
counties  was  comparatively  slight,  but  in  the  remaining  twenty-two  states 
it  was  considerable,  varying  from  10  in  Louisiana  to  166  in'  Iowa.  As  a 
broad  general  statement,  therefore,  it  may  be  safely  said  that  the  divorce 
rate  in  cities  of  at  least  100,000  inhabitants  is  greater  than  it  is  in  small 
cites  and  in  country  districts.  The  figures  for  the  earlier  decades  suggest, 
moreover,  that  the  divorce  rate  has  always  been  higher  in  the  large  cities 
than  in  the  smaller  cities  and  country  districts."  - 

Mr.   "\V.  F.  Wilcox,   one  of  the   foremost  authorities   upon   divorce   in   the 

United  States,  inclines  to  the  same  opinion." 

Not  only  is  the  divorce  rate,  as  we  are  led  to  believe,  absolutely  higher  in 
urban  than  in  rural  communities,  but  relatively  it  is  higher  still  since  the  pro- 
portion of  married  persons  in  the  adult  population  is  lower  in  urban  populations.4 

Although  no  studies  have  been  made  in  the  United  States  of  the  relative 
frequency  of  divorce,  desertion  and  family  disintegration  in  general  in  the  cities 
as  compared  with  the  rural  regions,  we  find  that  the  former  far  more  than  the 
latter  supply  conditions  which  seem  likely  to  loosen  family  ties  and  to  change 


1.  Of  945.62.5  divorces  granted  in  the  United  States  from  1SS7  to  1906.  415.o4r>. 
or  4M.9  pn-  cent,  wciv  on  th<-  ground  of  desertion  or  abandonment,  and  in  38  9  per  cent 
this  was  thi--  sole  cause  given.  Cruelty  ranks  a  distant  second  and  was  the  sole  cause 
given  in  only  IS. 5  per  cent  of  the  cas^s  Special  Reports  of  the  United  State*  Census 
Office:  Marriage  and  Divorce,  1867-1906,  I,  81. 

:>.      On.  cit.,  I.   18-19. 

3.  "Divorce   is   probably    especiallv    frequent   among   the   native    population    of   the 
United  States,  and  among  these  probably  more  common  in  the  city  than  in  the  country. 
This    statement    cannot   be    established    absolutely,    since    statistics    afford    no    means    of 
distinguishing   the   native   from    the   foreign-born    applicants.      It    is.    however,    the   most 
obvious    reason    for   explaining   the    fact    that,    while    in    Europe    the   c:ty    divorce    rate   is 
from  three  to  five  times  as  great  as  that  of  the  surrounding  country,   the  difference  in 
the  United  States  between  the  two  regions  is  very  much  less.      In  other  words,  the  great 
number  of  foreigners   in   American   cities   probably   tends   to  obscure,    by  a    low   divorc0 
rate    [since   they   are  predominantly   Roman   Catholic   and   so   forbidden   by   the   Church 
to   obtain   divorce],    the  high   rate  of   the  native   population."      Encyclopedia    Brittanira, 
article  on   "Divorce." 

4.  Urban  male.  54.7  per  cent.  :  rural.  56.8  per  cent.     Urban  female,  54.6  per  cent. ; 
rural,   63.3  per  cent.     Abstract,  Thirteenth  Census  of  the   United  States,  1910,  p.   163. 


10  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

/ 

the  essential  character  of  the  domestic  relation.  Desertion  is  one  of  the  re- 
sults of  domestic  instability.  We  think  of  it  today  as  peculiarly  a  problem  of 
the  city  because  "of  the  numerous  elements  within  the  city  which  make  for 
domestic  instability. 

(a)  In  the  city  the  restraint  of  the  mores  is  less  because  of  the  absence  of 
primary  group  attachments. 

"To  have  an  effective  public  opinion  holding  people  to  their  duties  it  is 
important  that  men  should  live  long  in  one  place  and  in  one  group,  inherit- 
ing traditional  ideas  and  enforcing  them  upon  one  another.  All  breaking  up 
of  old  associations  involves  an  'individualism'  which  is  nowhere  more 
active  than  in  family  relations." l 

"In  small  and  rude  communities  every  free  man,  or  at  best  every  head 
of  a  household,  feels  his  own  significance  and  realizes  his  own  independence. 

*  *     *     His  will  and  action  count  for  something  in  the  affairs  of  the  com- 
munity he  belongs  to."  2 

In  the  smaller  community  residence  is  relatively  permanent,  a  larger  pro- 
portion of  homes  and  property  are  owned;  and  by  virtue  of  this  fact  neighbor- 
hoods come  to  acquire  a  fixed  and  recognized  character  which  in  a  way  attaches 
to  the  persons  composing  them. 

"The  protection  and  care  of  a  piece  of  property  makes  for  thoughtful- 
ness  and  steadiness,  individualizes.  *  *  *  This  property,  so  responsive 
to  care  or  neglect,  is  a  standing  challenge  to  self-control.  *  *  *  The 
man  owns  his  home,  but  in  a  sense  his  home  owns  him,  checking  his  rash 
impulses,  holding  out  of  the  human  whirlpool."  3 

The  fact  of  one's  being  comparatively  fixed  and  identified  with  a  given 
locality  tends  to  establish  a  permanent  relationship  with  the  group.  The  ex- 
istence of  the  individual  is  merged  with  that  of  the  group  in  a  personal  and  pe- 
culiar way.  From  month  to  month,  from  year  to  year  he  reacts  upon  and  is 
reacted  upon  by  the  same  set  of  more  or  less  familiar  acquaintances.  He  is 
mindful  of  their  opinions  and  influenced  by  them  as  are  they  by  his.  Theirs  is 
a  primary  group 

"characterized  by  intimate,  face-to-face  association  and  co-operation     *     * 

*  fundamental  in  forming  the  social  nature  and  ideals  of  the  individual. 
The  result  of  intimate  association,  psychologically,  is  a  certain  fusion  of 
individualties  in  a  common  whole,  so  that  the  very  self,  for  many  purposes 
at  least,  is  the  common  life  and  purpose  of  the  group."  4 

So  long  as  the  individual  is  a  part  of  such  a  group  he  is  bound  by  local  at- 
tachments and  restraints,  governed  and  controlled  by  the  mores  of  the  group, 
in  a  way  which  he  cannot  ignore.8 

"The  growth  of  cities  has  been  accompanied  by  the  substitution  of  in- 
direct, 'secondary,'  for  face-to-face,  'primary'  relationship  in  the  associa- 
tions of  individuals  in  the  community.  *  *  *  A  very  large  part  of  the 
population  of  great  cities,  including  those  who  make  their  homes  in  tene- 
ments and  apartment  houses,  live  much  as  people  do  in  some  great  hotel, 
meeting  but  not  knowing  one  another.  The  effect  of  this  is  to  substitute 
fortuitous  and  casual  relationship  for  the  more  intimate  and  permanent  as- 


1.  C.  H.   Cooley,   Social  Organisation,  pp.   369-70. 

2.  James  Brice,  The  American  Commonwealth,  II,  Chap.  Ixxxiv. 

3.  E.    A.    Ross,    Social   Psychology,   p.    87. 

4.  C.   H.   Cooley,   op.   cit.,  p.    15. 

5.  "Tout   d'abord,    puisque   le   souci   de   1'opinion   publique   est   un   traite   caracter- 
istique  de  notre  nature,   il  est  a  remarquer  qu'un  cult'vateur  est  beaucoup  plus   retenu 
qu'un  ouvrier  par  la  crainte  du  scandale.    Dans  les  petites  localitSs,  ou.  tout  le  monde  se 
connait  ou  chacun  se  preoccupe  de  ce  qui  se  passe  chez  son  voisin,  un  proems  en  divorce 
prend   1'importance   d'un    £v£nement   public.     La   population    se   divise    en    deux    camps: 
celui  de  la  femme  et  celui  du  mari  et  chacun  des  deux  adversaires  arrive  a  1'audience 
escorte  de  ses  partisans.     Dans  les  quartiers  populeux  d'une  grande  ville,  au  contraire, 
un  pareil  diffe'rend  passe  completement  inapercu   et  personne  se  sange,   a  1'atelier  oft  a 
1'usine,    a   se   pr£occuper   de    la    situation    de    famille    de    ses    compagnons    de    travail." 
Auguste  Rol,  L'Evolution  du  divorce,  pp.   467-68. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  11 

sociations  of  the  smaller  communities.  *  *  *  It  is  probably  the  break- 
ing down  of  local  attachments  and  the  weakening  of  the  restraints  and  in- 
hibitions of  the  primary  group  under  the  influence  of  urban  environment, 
which  are  largely  responsible  for  the  increase  of  vice  and  crime  in  great 
cities."  1 

(b)  In  the  city  the  size  and  mobility  of  population  makes  for  anonymity 
of  the  individual,  icho  finds  in  this  a  greater  freedom  to  do  as  he  pleases.  The 
majority  of  inhabitants  dwell  id  quarters  which  they  do  not  own,2  paying  rent 
to  an  impersonal  landlord,  and  as  a  consequence  acquire  no  sentiment  of  per- 
sonal attachment  for  any  particular  locality  as  such.  Removal  to  other  resi- 
dence quarters  is  easily  and  frequently  accomplished,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
population  is  constantly  on  the  move.  ^ 

This  constant  shifting  of  the  population  prevents  the  formation  of  customs 
and  traditions  to  serve  as  instruments  of  social  control.  Any  conduct  which 
might  arouse  local  disapproval  need  not  be  inhibited  on  that  account;  one  may 
easily  go  to  a  community  where  one  is  unknown.  This  is  not  difficult  in  the 
city  where  a  removal  of  a  very  few  blocks  is  often  sufficient  to  place  one  in  a 
neighborhood  as  entirely  new  and  unrelated  to  the  former  one  as  if  it  were  in 
fact  another  city. 

"Another  reason  (why  desertion  is  less  common  in  Germany  than  in 
the  United  States)  is  that  it  is  nearly  impossible  for  anybody  in  Germany 
to  disappear.  You  have  to  register  with  the  local  authorities  whenever  you 
change  your  residence.  Furthermore,  every  man  who  is  in  some  way  con- 
nected with  the  army  is  bound  to  notify  his  regiment  of  every  change  of  ad- 
dress. If  he  neglects  this  obligation  he  is  punished  as  a  'deserter'  under 
military  law.  Very  few  men  like  to  take  this  risk.  Consequently  you  can 
easily  trace  any  man  whose  military  affiliation  you  know.  But  men  do  not 
like  to  be  traced  this  way."  3 

Released  from  the  restraint  which  the  intimate  and  personal  relation  of 

the  smaller  community  enforces,  lost  to  view  in  the  throng  of  anonymous, 

unrelated  and  indifferent  human  beings  which  graze  his  elbows,  the  individual 

tends  to  give  freer  rein  to  an  expression  of  his  desires.     Greater  freedom  is 

p«^rded  to  do  as  he  pleases  because  there  are  fewer  people  to  care  what  he 

.     Constant  advertising  of  inviting  fields  in  distant  localities  is  before  the 

.n  dweller.     Easy  transportation  makes   going   possible.     The   suggestion 

depart  comes  to  him  in  these  ways  which  are  not  presented  to  the  rural 

inhabitant. 

"Not  only  transportation  and  communication,  but  the  segregation  of 
the  urban  population  tends  to  facilitate  the  mobility  of  the  individual  man. 
The  processes  of  segregation  tend  to  establish  moral  distances  which  make 
the  city  a  mosaic  of  little  worlds  which  touch  but  do  not  interpenetrate. 
This  makes  it  possible  for  individuals  to  pass  quickly  from  one  moral 
milieu  to  another  and  encourages  the  fascinating  but  dangerous  experi- 
ment of  living  at  the  same  time  in  several  different  contiguous,  perhaps,  but 
widely  separated  worlds.  All  this  tends  to  give  the  city  a  superficial  and 


1.  Robert  E.   Park,   "The  City:   Suggestions  for  the   Investigation  of  Human   Be- 
havior in  the  City  Environment,"  American  Journal  of  Sociology,  XX    (March     1915) 
593,    595,    607-608. 

2.  A  comparison  of  homes  owned  with  homes  rented  in  the  five  largest  cities  of 
the  United  States,  as  compared  with  the  rest  of  the  country,  is  given  in  the  Thirteenth 
Census  of  the  United  States,  1910,  I,  1295  and  1313: 

City —  Homes  Owned.  Homes  Rented. 

New    York    11.7  per  cent  88.3  per  cent 

Chicago    26.2  per  cent  73.8  per  cent 

Philadelphia     26.6  .per  cent  73.4  per  cent 

Boston    11.1  per  cent  88.9  per  cent 

St.    Louis    25.0  per  cent  75.0  per  cent 

United    States    (at   large) ....  45.8  per  cent  54.2  per1  cent 

United    States    (farm    homes)  .  .          62. S  per  cent  37.2  per  cent 

3.  Dr.    Alix  Westerkamp,    letter,    Feb.    28,    1916. 


12  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

adventitious  character;  it  tends  to  complicate  social  relationships  and  to 
produce  new  and  divergent  individual  types.  It  introduces,  at  the  same 
time,  an  element  of  chance  and  adventure  which  adds  to  the  stimulus 
of  city  life  and  gives  it  for  young  and  fresh  nerves  a  peculiar  attractive- 
ness. The  lure  of  great  cities  is  perhaps  a  consequence  of  stimulations 
which  act  directly  upon  the  reflexes.  As  a  type  of  human  behavior  it  may 
be  explained,  like  the  attraction  of  the  flame  for  the  moth,  as  a  sort  of 
tropism.  *  *  *  In  the  long  run  every  individual  finds  somewhere  among 
the  varied  manifestations  of  city  life  the  sort  of  environment  in  which  he 
expands  and  feels  at  ease;  finds,  in  short,  the  moral  climate  in  which  his 
peculiar  nature  obtains  the  stimulation  that  brings  his  innate  qualities  to 
full  and  free  expression."1 

"The  force  of  suggestion  depends  somewhat  on  bodily  and  mental  con- 
dition. Fatigue,  disease  and  'nerves'  lessen  the  powers  of  inhibition,  while 
mob-madness  [a  characteristic  of  city  life]  'leads  men  captive  to  the  im- 
pressions of  the  moment."2 

As  a  result,  moral  standards  tend  to  break  down.  The  wide  difference 
between  the  environments  within  and  without  the  city  produce  different 
evaluations.  Family  life,  religion,  certain  ethical  codes  so  completely  accepted 
as  to  be  taken  for  granted  in  the  smaller  community,  may  fall  into  utterly 
different  perspective  and  become  of  minor  importance  amid  city  surroundings 
where  the  emphasis  is  altered.  The  very  things  which  constitute  the  ideals 
of  one  sphere  may  become  objects  of  near-contempt  in  another. 

(c)     In  the  city  the  economic  basis  of  family  unity  tends  to  disappear. 

"The  typical  family  community  is  one  which  is  held  together  by  a  com- 
mon industry  in  which  each  member  can  partake,  according  to  his  strength 
or  capacity;  and  the  industry  which  most  readily  lends  itself  to  the  co- 
operation of  a  number  of  persons  of  different  age  or  sex,  is  farming  and  the 
cultivation  of  the  land.  In  it  there  is  work  for  all  capacities;  the  weakest 
can  contribute  something,  the  most  stupid  can  give  his  strength,  and  the 
most  able  can  find  scope  for  his  skill  and  organizing  power.  And  so  it 
becomes  necessary  to  carry  into  industry  the  principle  of  family  life,  that 
each  gives  according  to  his  powers  and  receives  according  to  his  needs. 
Moreover,  and  this  is  important  for  the  question  before  us,  this  industrial 
unity  of  a  family  means  that  its  members  are  stronger  in  combination 
than  they  would  be  apart.  A  real  gain  is  effected  by  the  assignment  of 
work  to  those  most  fitted  to  do  it,  and  thus  there  is  a  genuine  economic 
force  to  hold  the  Family  together."3 

"On  peut  done  affirmer  que  la  prosperite  de  la  clase  agricole  est 
basee  sur  1'union  etroite  de  tous  les  membres  de  la  famille  et  que  tout 
evenement  qui  brise  cette  intimite  porte  atteinte  au  bien-etre  de  tous."  * 

Rarely  is  this  economic  unity  possible  in  large  cities.  Industrialism,  which 
centres  in  cities,  inevitably  results  in  throwing  the  members  of  the  family 
group  into  one  of  two  classes:  workers  (usually  wage-earners),  or  those 
economically  dependent  upon  workers.  The  industrial  co-operation  of  the  rural 
family  disappears.  The  business  interest  of  the  working  members  are  di- 
verse; unless  they  pool  their  wages  in  a  common  family  fund  their  economic 
life  has  nothing  of  kinship.  In  the  factory  and  commercial  life  of  the  city 
the  workers  have  been  "banded  together  into  groups  where  the  individuals 
are  repetitions  of  each  other  instead  of  being  complementary  factors."5 

"Le  travail  industrial     *     *     *     desagrege  la  famille.     II  en  disperse 

les  membres  et  donne  a  chacun  d'eux  des  preoccupations   differentes  et 


1.  Robert  E.  Park,  op.  cit.,  p.  608. 

2.  E.   A.   Ross,   Social   Control,  p.    147. 

3.  Helen  Bosanquet,    The  Family,  pp.   195-96. 

4.  Auguste  Rol,   op.   cit.,  p.   469. 

5.  Helen  Bosanquet,   op.  cit.,  p.   199. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  13 

des  interets  divers.  Le  mari,  la  femme,  les  enfants  travaillent,  presque 
toujours,  dans  des  ateliers  differents,  le  plus  souvent  pour  des  industries 
qui  n'ont  rein  de  commun  entre  elles.  Us  se  retrouvent  le  soir,  et  se 
quittent  le  lendemain.  Us  n'  ont  pas  une  meme  but,  ils  n'  emploient  pas 
leur  activite  a  une  meme  oeuvre  ou  plutot,  ils  n'  ont,  pas  de  but,  puisqu'  ils 
ne  sont  point  interesses  au  succes  de  1'  enterprise  a  laquelle  ils  collaborent. 
Le  mari  n'  est  pas  le  chef  d'  un  groupe  de  travailleurs  unis  dans  un  meme 
effort,  la  femme  n'  est  pas,  pour  lui,  une  collaboratrice;  ils  ne  sont  que 'des 
associes  pour  la  table  et  le  togement,  tout  disposes  a  rompre  le  contrat  qui 
les  le,  a  la  promiere  difficulte,  et  qu'  aucun  interet  important  ne  retiendre 
quand  leur  amour-propre  ou  leur  besoin  d'  independence  serant  en  jeu."  1 

The  destruction  of  the  economic  basis  of  domestic  unity  makes  for 
family  instability.  If  the  woman,  either  through  choice  or  necessity,  leaves 
the  home  and  becomes  a  wage-earner  the  husband's  feeling  of  responsibility 
for  providing  for  her  may  be  lessened,  and  he  may  feel  more  at  liberty  to 
desert  her  should  the  impulse  come  than  he  otherwise  would.  The  woman 
in  turn,  from  the  very  fact  of  being  economically  independent,  may  be  led 
to  assert  her  independence  in  ways  which  will  in  themselves  be  provocative 
of  household  friction.  At  best  she  cannot  work  outside  and  at  the  same  time 
keep  up  an  attractive  home.-  Furthermore,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  en- 
trance of  women  into  wage-earning  occupations  before  marriage  tends  to 
make  them  unfit  for  married  life  when  they  eventually  assume  its  duties; 
and  this  in  itself  may  contribute  to  domestic  unhappiness.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  the  wife  does  not  earn  wages  which  will  contribute  to  the  household  budget 
she  will,  in  the  city,  be  more  of  an  economic  burden  on  the  man  than  she  would 
in  the  country,  because  the  expense  of  living  is  greater  there. 

"At  one  time  marriage  was,  for  women,  about  the  only  way  to  a  respect- 
able maintenance,  while  to  men  a  good  housewife  was  equally  an  economic 
necessity.  *  *  *  In  the  towns  [now]  the  economic  considerations  are 
mostly  opposed  to  married  life.  Besides  making  husband  and  wife  less 
necessary  to  each  other  these  changes  tend  to  make  women  restless."  - 

Family  arrangements  may  become  less  valuable  to  both  because  other  inter- 
ests are  at  hand  to  detract  from  the  central  importance  of  the  home.  They  as 
individuals  are  less  dependent  upon  it.  Restaurants  and  hotels  are  at  hand  to 
accommodate  domestic  needs;  saloons,  lodges  and  clubs  of  various  sorts  minis- 
ter to  the  interests  of  sociability;  recreation  and  amusement  are  more  satis- 
fyingly  provided  by  specialized  devices  for  public  entertainment  than  by  the  home 
itself.  Even  sexual  desire  does  not  depend  for  gratification  upon  a  marital 
relation.  The  city  vastly  increases  the  opportunity  for  sexual  adventure,  and 
that  at  a  time  when  the  weakening  of  the  domestic  ties  makes  more  easy  an 
acquiescence  to  its  allurements. 

As  the  home  gradually  yields  to  outside  agencies  the  right  to  minister  to 
the  various  desires  of  its  members — desires  which  formerly  it  was  the  home's 
especial  prerogative  to  satisfy — its  essential  character  slowly  changes.  The 
tendency  is  for  the  home  of  the  city  dweller  to  degenerate  into  a  mere  meeting 
place,  to  be  used  at  the  convenience  of  those  who  live  at  that  particular  address. 

Not  only  does  the  family  relation  in  all  of  these  ways  tend  to  become  less 
necessary:  by  imposing  its  compelling  demands  between  the  individual  and  his 
personal  desires  it  may  become  to  him  an  unwelcome  bondage,  an  obstacle 
between  himself  and  things  which  he  values  more  highly.  It  throws  demands 
upon  his  time  and  purse  which  he  may  be  selfish  enough  to  resent. 

If  not  a  burden,  a  family  is  at  least  a  luxury  to  the  man  who  is  in  the 
city,  as  is  borne  out  by  the  general  attitude  there  toward  married  life.  The 
lower  marriage  rate,  the  advanced  age  at  marriage,  the  shrinkage  in  the  size 


1.     Auguste  Rol.   op.  cit.,  pp.   469-70. 

"It  is  certain  that  where  the  wife  abandons  the  home  for  outside  work  or 
pleasure  the  bonds  which  hold  the  family  together  become  of  the  slightest."  Helen 
Bosanquet,  op.  cit.,  p.  200. 

3.     C.   H.   Cooler,   op.   cit.,  pp.   267-GS. 


14  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

of  families1  whatever  other  explanations  therefor  may  be  offered,  at  least  tes- 
tify to  the  fact  that  the  possession  of  a  family  has  become  a  more  difficult 
matter  than  in  the  past. 

In  the  smaller  community  the  opposite  of  all  this  is  true.  Not  only  can  a 
family  be  enjoyed  at  less  sacrifice,  financial  and  otherwise,  but  without  a  family 
a  man  is  shut  off  from  many  creature  comforts.  It  is  essential  to  the  highest 
satisfaction  of  his  physical  needs  and  without  it  many  social  satisfactions  are 
denied.  More  than  this,  his  fellows  expect  him  to  become  a  family  man  and  he 
cannot  remain  a  bachelor  without  disregarding  the  opinions  of  his  group.  Once 
in  possession  of  a  family  he  cannot  voluntarily  disassociate  himself  from  it 
without  defying  public  opinion,  for  this  also  is  contrary  to  the  mores  of  his 
group.  Indeed,  should  domestic  friction  arise,  he  is  far  more  like  to  adjust 
himself  to  the  disagreeable  situation  and  to  "make  the  best  of  it"  in  the  country 
than  in  the  city  for  the  very  reason  that  the  suggestion  to  escape  his  difficulty 
by  deserting  would  scarcely  reach  him  in  a  community  where  desertion  is  all  but 
unknown. 

(d)  The  spirit  of  discontent  characteristic  of  the  city. — Mr.  Willcox,  in  his 
study  of  the  divorce  problem,  refers  to  the  "spread  of  discontent"  that  is  mani- 
festing itself  in  so  many  ways.2 

That  a  spirit  of  discontent  in  general  is  abroad  in  the  land  is  not  to  be 
doubted.  That  it  is  particularly  characteristic  of  the  city  is  likewise  obvious. 
Lawlessness,  crime,  suicide,  industrial  conflict,  restlessness  and  dissatisfaction 
in  every  field  are  more  pronounced  in  the  confusion  of  great  cities.  To  the  rest- 
less and  discontented  spirits  of  the  city-reared,  must  be  added  those  of  the 
thousands  who  leave  smaller  places  and  seek  the  city  because  of  dissatisfac- 
tion with  their  lot  in  the  less  pretentious  locality.  The  dissatisfied  go  to  the 
city.  The  places  they  leave  are  more  quiet  because  of  their  departure;  the  city 
is  more  restless  because  they  are  added  to  it. 

Desertion  is  one  of  the  by-products  of  the  spirit  of  discontent  which  is 
characteristic  of  the  city. 

2— DESERTION  MORE  FREQUENTLY  MANIFESTED  IN  THE  HUSBAND. 

In  this  connection  another  point  is  pertinent:  the  husband  is  more  fre- 
quently a  deserter  than  is  the  wife.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Chicago 
Court  of  Domestic  Relations  makes  no  provision  on  its  official  record  blanks  for 
the  woman  as  the  deserter,  but  only  for  the  man.  "Defendant"  versus  "Wife" 
are  the  headings  employed,  suggestive  of  the  fact  that  the  defendant  is  almost 
invariably  the  man. 

Of  the  five  thousand  charity  cases  which  came  under  the  care  of  the  New 
York  Charity  Organization  Society  for  the  two  years  ending  September  30,  1908, 
499  were  deserted  women  and  fourteen  were  deserted  men.3  Of  the  591  de- 
sertion histories  submitted  to  Miss  Lilian  Brandt  as  a  basis  for  her  study  in 
1905,  in  only  seventeen  was  the  wife  found  to  be  the  deserter.4  Of  the  1747 
warrants  issued  during  1914  by  the  domestic  relations  courts  of  the  Boroughs 
of  Manhattan  and  The  Bronx,  only  sixteen  were  for  women.5  Of  the  9,065  de- 


1.  Statistics  show  that  wage-earners  generally  have  fewer  children  than  farmers. 
"C'est  qu'un  enfant  est,  pour  eux,  tine  lourde  charge  et  que  1'incertitude  de  leur  situation 
ne  leur  permet  m§me  pas  1'espoir  de  lui  assurer  un  avenir.     A  la  campagne,  au  contraire, 
une  enfant  est  un  prgcieux  auxiliare.     Des  les  premieres  anne£s  de  1'adolescence,  il  rend 
des   services  et  collabore  a   1'oeuvre  commune."      Auguste  Rol,    op   cit.,  p.    468. 

2.  "So  closely  related  to  the    growth    of  industrialism  as  hardly  to  deserve  treat- 
ment  as   a   separate   cause,    is   the   spread    of   a   spirit    of   restless    dissatisfaction.      Mr. 
Brice  has  called  this  'the  age  of  discontent.'  and  this  characteristic  of  the  time  in  this 
country  and  Europe  manifests  itself  in  a  theoretical   questioning  and  criticism  of  mar- 
riage,   and,    perhaps,    the   weakening   of   its   hold   upon   the   community."      The    Divorce 
Problem,   p.    70. 

3.  E.  T.  Devine,  Misery  and  Its  Causes,  p.  210. 

4.  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four  Deserters  and  Their  Families,  p.   9. 

5.  Annual  Report  of  the  City  Magistrates'  Courts  of  the  City  of  New   York    (1st 
Division),   1914. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  15 

sertion  cases  handled  by  the  Chicago  United  Charities  from  1909  to  1915  in- 
clusive, only  eleven  were  cases  of  deserting  women.1,2 

Tradition  confines  the  women  to  the  home.  However  much  a  woman  may 
desire  to  leave  her  husband,  unless  the  homes  of  friends  or  relatives  offer  her 
a  refuge  she  will  be  hard  pressed  to  find  a  place  to  go.  Because  of  our  con- 
ventions the  eye  of  suspicion  is  much  more  quickly  turned  upon  a  homeless 
woman  than  upon  a  homeless  man;  the  latter  may  go  where  he  likes  almost  un- 
questioned. If  there  are  young  children  she  is  still  more  firmly  anchored.  It  is 
difficult  to  take  them  along,  and  still  more  difficult  to  leave  them  behind.  Affec- 
tion binds  her  to  them.  Only  rarely  is  a  woman  found  willing  to  yield  the  com- 
panionship of  her  children  in  order  to  obtain  greater  freedom  for  herself. 

Between  male  arid  female  on  this  point  seems  to  be  a  difference  of  temper- 
ment.  Where  domestic  affairs  go  wrong  the  woman. is  inclined  to  find  relief 
in  tears  and  upbraidings;  the  man  resorts  to  profanity  and  to  escape  from  the 
scene.  Whether  this  distinction  would  manifest  itself  in  this  way  if  desertion 
were  as  easy  for  one  as  for  the  other,  is  a  question.  The  fact  is  that  at  pres- 
ent desertion  is  not  equally  convenient  to  both.  Social  conventions,  physical 
structure,  the  burden  of  children  and  economic  dependence  are  definite  bar- 
riers which  tend  to  hold  the  wife  in  the  home,  however  much  she  may  desire 
her  freedom. 

3— DESERTION  NOT  A  RACIAL  PHENOMENON. 

Because  the  domestic  relation  is  so  intimate  and  personal  conditions  in- 
evitably arise  within  it  which  cause  friction  and  clashes.  Since  these  condi- 
tions— inherent  in  the  very  nature  of  the  family  and  the  intimacies  which  it 
imposes — are  common  to  all  people  we  find  desertion  to  be  present  to  some  ex- 
tent among  all  races.3  Undoubtedly  desertion  will  vary  in  the  different  regions  as 
conditions  for  it  are  favorable  or  unfavorable;  and  the  racial  customs,  senti- 
ments and  general  attitudes  toward  the  domestic  relation  will  to  an  extent 
affect  behavior.  Observation  of  the  great  number  of  nationalities  represented 
among  deserters  in  our  American  cities,  however,  suggest  a  tendency  common 
to  all  types  of  mankind  to  respond  in  the  same  way  in  the  same  situation, 
whatever  may  have  been  their  inherited  racial  traditions. 

Miss  Brandt's  574  deserters,  taken  at  random  from  twenty-five  cities  of 
fifteen  states,  showed  twenty-two  different  nationalities.4  Among  the  327  cases 
studied  from  the  Chicago '  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  eighteen  nationalities 
were  represented.  A  similar  diversity  appears  on  the  records  of  the  domestic 
relations  courts  of  the  Borough  of  Manhattan  and  The  Bronx,5  and  in  the 
Boston  investigation  of  desertion  in  1901.s 

Among  8,957  deserted  families  aided  by  the  Cook  County  Agent  during  the 
six  years  from  1909  to  1915  inclusive  (except  for  1914,  for  which  no  report  has 
been  published)  twenty-nine  nationalities  were  represented.7 

Dr.  Alix  Westerkamp,  formerly  head  of  the  Woman's  Legal  Aid  Society 
of  Frankfort-on-Main,  and  later  General  Secretary  of  the  German  Association 
for  the  Protection  of  Children,  out  of  a  seven  years'  experience  in  social  work 
in  Germany  speaks  as  follows  concerning  desertion: 

"Family    desertion    is    not   nearly    so   big   a   problem   in    the    German 


1.  Compiled  from  the  unpublished  records  of  the  United  Charities  of  Chicago. 

2.  These  figures,  however,  do  not  necessarily  mean  that  the  ratio  of  desertion  is 
so  excessively  disproportionate  between  the   sexes.      There  is   more   reason,   usually,   for 
the  wife  than  for  the  husband  to  make  known   that  she  has  been  deserted.     The  hus- 
band  is   commonly   the   breadwinner.      When    he    deserts,    she    becomes    dependent,    and 
is  compelled  to   seek  assistance  from   a  court   o"  a   relief  agency.      For   this  reason  the 
man's  desertion  is  more  likely  to  become  a  matter  of  record  than  that  of  the  wife. 

?,.  Vide,  Chap,  i,  Sec.   2. 

4.  Op.  cit.,  p.   18. 

5.  Op.  cit. 

6.  Zilpha  D.   Smith,   Deserted  Wives  and  Deserting  Husbands,  p.    4. 

7.  See  Table  I.  page  16.     Compiled  from  the  annual  reports. 


A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 


TABLE  I. 
NATIONALITY    OR    NATIVITY. 


Total  No.  of 

All  Cases 

Aided. 

Jewish     4,239 

Negro     4.080 

Lithuanian     1,491 

Danish     i'2  5 

Canadian     749 

Irish     5,562 

American    (white)     13,820 

French    260 

Scotch     334 

Hungarian    '  446 

German    7,109 

Russian    302 

Slavonian     965 

Polish     13,693 

Swede    1,584 

Bohemian     3,197 

English     873 

Austrian     832 

Hollander    272 

Norwegian     696 

Italian     6,079 

Belgian*     78 

Finlander*     29 

Roumanian*     26 

Spanish*     1  r, 

Swiss*     89 

Syrian*     38 

Welsh*    46 

Greek*    75 


Total  No.  of     Percent-          Rank  : 
Desertion  Cases    age  of       No.  Deser- 
Aided.         Desertions.         tions. 


29   nationalities 


67,213 


903 
866 
264 

40 
128 

590 

2.177 

38 

48 


37 

116 

1,570 

173 

335 

83 

76 

23 

58 

427 

12 


1 

15 

1 

8 

15 

8,957 


21.3 

21.1 

17.7 

17.7 

17.1 

16.0 

15.7 

14.6 

14.3 

13.0 

12.4 

12.2 

12.0 

11.4 

10.9 

10.4 

9.5 

9.1 

8.4 

8.3 

7.0 


9 

10 
11 
1  2 
1?, 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 


Rank : 

All 
Cases. 

6 

7 

10 
21 
14 

5 

1 

20 
17 
16 

3 

18 
11 

2 

9 

8 

12 
13 
19 
15 

4 


*  Number  of  cases  aided  too  small  to  justify  any  conclusions  as  to  the  ratio  of 
desertion. 

Empire  as  it  is  in  the  United  States  of  America.  *  *  *  I  remember  being 
perfectly  dumfounded  when,  after  coming  to  this  country,  by  and  by  I 
realized  the  size  of  the  problem  in  your  large  cities." * 

In  spite  of  the  traditions  of  the  Fatherland  more  than  twelve  per  cent  of  the 
7109  German  families  relieved  by  the  Cook  County  Agent  during  the  six  years 
reported,  are  shown  by  the  above  table  to  have  been  deserted  by  their  heads. 

Jewish  life  normally  is  such  as  to  bind  the  members  of  the  family  closely 
together.  The  Hebrew  people  are  traditionally  devoted  to  the  family;  venera- 
tion for  it  has  been  from  time  immemorial  a  part  of  their  religion,  and  all  their 
racial  mores  from  days  of  tribal  organization  until  now  have  conduced  to  keep 
inviolate  the  obligations  and  ties  of  family  life.  We  are  told  by  leaders  of 
social  work  among  the  Jews  that  today  desertion  is  uncommon  in  Hebrew 
communities  of  the  Old  World.  Yet  among  the  Jewish  people  in  the  United 
States  desertion  is  at  present  a  problem  of  no  less  proportions  than  among  the 
Gentiles,  so  far  as  there  are  records  for  comparison.2 

These  facts  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  desertion  is  not  a  racial  or  national 
characteristic,  but  an  effect  of  the  social  situation.  Under  the  influence  of 
American  city  life,  apparently,  the  restraints  of  racial  tradition  are  loosened 
and  the  family  is  disintegrated. 


Letter,    FH>.    28,    1916. 
Vide,  Tables  I  and  V   (b). 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  17 


4— DESERTION    NOT   A   PHENOMENON   OF   RELIGION   OR   SECT. 

With  respect  to  religious  affiliation  no  sect  nor  creed  is  exempt.  Jew  and 
Gentile,  Protestant  and  Catholic,  Greek  and  Roman,  as  well  as  those  who  deny 
every  form  of  religious  connection,  appear  as  deserters  in  the  Court  of  Domestic 
Relations  and  in  the  records  of  the  relief  societies.  The  proportion  of  Catholics 
listed  as  deserters  is  perhaps  higher  than  it  would  be  if  their  church  permitted 
divorce,  since  some  men  may  resort  to  desertion  to  secure  relief,  who  would 
secure  divorces  if  they  were  not  forbidden. 

Only  nineteen  persons  of  the  654  involved  in  the  327  cases  taken  from  the 
records  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  failed  to  report  them- 
selves of  some  religious  affiliation.  Possibly  many  of  those  who  did  report 
themselves  as  such  were  not  really  church  communicants  but  gave  as  their 
connection  that  of  their  parents.  Of  these  deserters  who  were  members  the 
evidence  is  that  they  were  only  nominally  so  at  best  and  not  a  class  which 
their  respective  churches  would  like  to  have  considered  as  typical  of  their 
membership. 

TABLE   II. 

RELIGIOUS  AFFILIATION. 

No.  of  Women. 

148 
138 
31 
1 

318 
9 

327 


Protestant 

No.  of  Mt.-n. 
153 

Roman   Catholic    .  . 

131 

Jewish 

32 

Greek   Catholic 

1 

No    church     

2 

Total    . 

319 

No    record    

8 

Grand   Total    . 

327 

Xote. — In  57  cases  husband  and  wife  were  of  different  religious  training.  In  270 
cases  they  were  of  the  same. 

5— DESERTION  AS  "THE  POOR   MAN'S  DIVORCE." 

Family  disintegration  is  not  peculiar  to  any  division  of  our  society.  The 
instability  of  domestic  relations  is  manifested  as  often  among  the  rich  as 
among  the  poor.  One  has  but  to  turn  the  pages  of  a  metropolitan  daily  to 
discover  that  no  social  group  or  class  is  exempt. 

Separations  may  take  the  form  of  divorce  or  of  desertion.  They  differ, 
however,  in  an  important  way:  divorce  is  a  legal  and  authorized  separation  of 
man  and  wife  deliberately  entered  into  and  officially  sanctioned  and  recorded; 
desertion  is  illegal,  unauthorized,  not  officially  recorded,  and  is  a  spontaneous 
action.  To  the  former  there  are  three  parties:  the  man,  the  woman,  and  the 
public  represented  by  the  court;  to  the  latter  there  are  but  two — the  public  is 
not  consulted  nor  petitioned  for  consent  to  the  action. 

Of  these  two  forms  of  conjugal  separation,  observation  leads  to  the  con- 
clusion that  desertion  is  characteristic  of  the  poorer  classes  of  the  city  rather 
than  of  the  wealthier.  That  is  to  say,  that  while  disintegration  of  families  is 
common  to  all  classes,  this  particular  /orm  of  disintegration  tends  to  occur  with 
disproportionate  frequency  among  classes  of  the  lower  economic  strata,  whereas 
divorce  and  legal  separation  are  more  commonly  resorted  to  among  the  upper. 

Observation  of  deserters  shows  them  to  be  for  the  most  part,  men  of 
humble  occupations — wage-earners.  Of  the  327  cases  examined  from  the 
Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  only  thirteen  men  were  in  business  or 
practicing  for  themselves.  The  remaining  314,  except  one  who  was  living 
without  occupation  at  his  parents'  expense,  and  eight  who  were  unrecorded, 
were  scattered  among  fifty  occupations,  ranging  from  the  lowly  positions  of 
janitor  and  bootblack  on  up  to  "vaudeville  artist";  and  over  half,  as  a  glance 
at  the  accompanying  table  will  show,  would  be  classed  as  unskilled  laborers. 


18 


A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 


TABLE  III. 

OCCUPATIONS  OF  MEN. 
No.  of  Men.       One  man  to  each  of  the  following : 


Laborer     35 

Teamster 

Clerk   and    Bookkeeper 

Salesman  and  Agent 20 

Tailor     13 

Carpenter    

Machinist    10 

Chauffeur    10 

Porter    10 

Street  Car  Service 

Waiter     7 

Janitor     5 

Printer 5 

Peddler 

Painter   5 

Barber 5 

Switchman    

Bartender    

Baker 

Iron-worker    

Plumber     

Electrician     

Cook     3 

Factory    Hand     

Plasterer     3 

Farmer    

Engineer    

Blacksmith     2 

Packer 2 

Butcher      2 

Miscellaneous    (stated,  see  next 

column)     21 

Total    known     : 266 

Miscellaneous    (not  stated)  ....  52 

No  occupation 1 

No    record    8 

Grand  total    . 


Vaudeville  Artist 

Express  Business 

Hog  Driver 

Shoe   Repairer 

Wood  Worker 

Marble    Polisher 

Bootblack 

Railroad   Inspector 

Bricklayer 

Boxmaker 

Watchman 

Tinner 

Elevator  Operator 

Sailor 

Cigar  Maker 

Fireman 

Shipping  Clerk 

Dentist 

Furniture   Polisher 

Steamfitter 

Sausage  Maker 

Total — 21 


were  steady  workers;    49 


Note. — Of  127  cases  where  the  distinction  was  made, 
were  irregular  workers. 

The  wages  of  these  men  are  small,  such  as  usually  accompany  the  oc- 
cupations listed.  Of  the  284  who  were  left  when  the  thirty  of  whom  there  was 
no  record,  and  the  thirteen  who  were  working  for  themselves,  were  deducted, 
212  were  receiving  when  working  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  per  week;  and 
169  were  receiving  less  than  twenty  dollars  per  week.  These  wages  do  not 
Indicate  affluence. 

TABLE  IV. 

USUAL   WAGES    OF   MAN    PER   WEEK,    WHEN    WORKING. 
Number  of  men  receiving — 

Less    than    $7    per   week 1 

$  7   to   $   8   per  week 3 

9    to      11    per   week 18 

12   to      14   per  week 51 

15  to     19  per  week 96 

20   to      24   per  week 43 


25   and  over  per  week 


72 

Total  known    ....................................  ....................  284 

In  business  for  themselves,   or  practicing  a  profession  ...........................    13 

No  record  ....................................................................    30 

Grand  total    . 


Note. — Of  the  72   receiving  "25  and  over"  : 
3  reported  $  60  per  week 
1  reported       70  per  week 
1  reported     110  per  week 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  19 

Judge  William  DeLacy  of  the  Juvenile  Court  of  the  District  of  Columbia, 
in  speaking  before  the  Seventh  Maryland  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correc- 
tions at  Baltimore,  gave  as  his  opinion  that  "desertion  and  non-support  seem 
to  be  the  poor  man's  method  of  enjoying  a  divorce."  Honorable  Joseph  Z. 
Uhlir,  after  thirteen  months  on  the  bench  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic 
Relations,  concurs  in  Judge  DeLacey's  opinion:  k 

"The  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  is  primarily  a  court  for  poor  people 
and  immigrants.    The  rich  settle  their  domestic  difficulties  elsewhere,  either 
by  suit  for  divorce,  or  by  a  separation  mutually  agreed  upon."  1 
Mr.  Percy  S.  Grant  in  an  article  on  "Divorce  and  the  Family"  speaks  even 
more  strongly: 

"Desertion,  not  divorce,  is  the  recourse  of  the  poor.  *  *  *  I  have 
never  personally  known  a  divorced  person  in  the  working  classes.  *  *  * 
The  rules  of  the  game  are  not  understood  and  observed.  They  will  not  go 
through  the  forms  of  legal  release  when  they  cannot  endure  legal  ties. 
They  take  matters  in  their  own  hands  and  break  the  rules  like  children."  2 

As  to  the  probable  reasons  for  this  difference: 

If  the  rich  man  no  longer  cares  to  stay  with  his  family  he  can  afford  to 
employ  the  law  to  obtain  release  (even  to  the  extent  of  migrating  to  another 
state  for  the  purpose  if  need  be) ,  whereas  the  poor  man  cannot.  Amicable 
release  may  be  expedited  by  his  ability  to  make  provision  for  his  family's 
economic  needs,  in  the  form  of  alimony  or  voluntary  settlement. 

Moreover,  the  wealthy  man  finds  divorce  more  convenient  than  desertion. 
Economic  interests  confine  him  to  a  specific  locality  and  bind  him  to  a  given 
community.  A  professional  man  with  a  clientele  built  up  after  patient  labor, 
or  one  established  in  a  fixed  business,  or  one  occupying  a  salaried  position  of 
trust  to  which  he  has  attained  only  after  years  of  climbing,  is  less  mobile  than 
the  casual  laborer.  He  is  not  at  liberty  to  pick  up  and  leave  as  is  a  wage- 
earner,  who  can  carry  with  him  wherever  he  goes  his  ability  to  labor,  which 
is  his  chief  stock-in-trade.  Such  a  one  prefers  to  resort  to  the  courts  for  a 
solution  of  his  difficulties  rather  than  to  make  the  sacrifice  of  business  op- 
portunity and  prestige  which  desertion  would  necessitate. 

The  mores  in  respect  to  divorce  are  changing.  In  more  sophisticated  com- 
munities it  is  no  longer  looked  upon  as  a  disgrace  as  it  was  at  one  time.  Di- 
vorced persons  do  not  lose  caste  in  the  higher  social  circles;  they  may  gain 
social  importance  as  a  result  of  the  status.  In  some  communities,  at  least, 
desertion  is  not  looked  upon  complacently,  and  one  who  deserts  may  fall  in 
public  esteem.  Where  this  is  the  case  additional  reason  is  afforded  for  pre- 
ferring divorce  as  a  method  of  settlement  of  marital  difficulties. 

The  poorer  classes,  as  Judge  Uhlir  indicates,  carry  their  troubles  to  the 
divorce  court  less  freely.  First  of  all,  the  expense  is  well-nigh  prohibitive  for 
the  very  poor.3  Second,  the  prohibition  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  partic- 
ularly influential  among  the  masses  of  poor  in  cities,  who,  owing  largely  to 
European  parentage,  are  predominantly  Catholic.  Third,  there  is  among  these 
classes,  particularly  among  the  immigrants,  an  ignorance  of  the  procedure 
necessary  to  secure  divorce,  coupled  with  a  suspicion  of  courts  and  officers, 
which  keeps  them  from  resorting  to  the  law. 

On  the  other  hand,  desertion  brings  about  the  desired  result  just  as  effec- 
tively; and  its  inexpensiveness  and  the  ease  with  which  it  may  be  accomplished 
under  all  conditions,  recommend , it.  Neither  does  desertion  carry  with  it  the 
finality  that  characterizes  divorce  and  legal  separation.  It  permits  the  deserter, 
should  he  desire  to  do  so,  to  return  to  his  family.  Finally,  among  the  poorer 
classes,  especially  among  the  immigrant  populations  of  great  cities,  no  social 
stigma  attaches  to  the  man  who  leaves  his  family. 


1.  Report  of  the   Work  of  the   [Chicago!    Court  of  Domestic  Relations,   1913-1914, 

2.  Ainslee's  Magazine,  April,   1902. 

3.  Mr.  Patrick  J.  J.  McCarthy,  Divorce  Statistician  of  Cook  County,  111.  estimates 
ifty  dollars  as  the  average  cost  of  obtaining  a  divorce  in  Chicago. 


20  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 


6— DESERTION    NOT   PRIMARILY   DUE  TO    ECONOMIC   CONDITIONS. 

Although  desertion  is  more  common  among  the  poor,  the  corollary  need 
not  be  drawn  that  poverty  is  the  cause  of  desertion.  This  is  a  very  generally 
accepted  opinion,  but  the  facts  do  not  sustain  it.  Desertion  does  not  appear 
to  be  due  primarily,  at  least,  to  economic  conditions.1 

If  desertion  depended  primarily  upon  the  economic  condition  of  the  deserter- 
it  might  be  expected  that  the  desertion  rate  would  reach  its  highest  point  in 
times  of  industrial  depression  or  extensive  unemployment  when  poverty  is  most 
widespread  and  acute.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  exact  reverse  of  this  condition 
appears.  During  the  winter  of  1914-'15  Chicago,  in  company  with  the  other  cities 
of  the  United  States,  passed  through  the  severest  condition  of  unemployment  of 
more  than  two  decades.  The  strain  upon  her  public  and  private  charities  was 
the  most  exacting  they  have  ever  experienced.  Yet  the  percentage  of  applica- 
tions for  relief  from  deserted  families  was  much  less  than  in  normal  years. 
The  following  table  prepared  from  the  annual  reports  of  Chicago's  three  leading 
charities  for  the  year  will  make  the  point  clear: 

Increase  in  number  of  all  cases  aided  in  1915   over  1914: 

United     Charities     35.00  per  cent 

Cook  County  Agent    39.60  per  cent 

Associated    Jewish    Charities     32.00   per  cent 

Decrease  in  per  cent  of  desertion   cases: 

1914 — United     Charities     10.60  per  cent 

Cook  County  Agent    11.60  per  cent 

Associated  Jewish   Charities    9.33   per  cent 

1915 — United  Charities    8'.09  per  cent 

Cook  County  Agent    9.20  per  cent 

Associated  Jewish  Charities    7.00  per  cent 

In   1915   over   1914 — United   Charities 2.51   per  cent 

Cook  County  Agent    2.40  per  cent 

Associated  Jewish  Charities 2.32   per  cent 

Bearing  upon  this  point  is  the  very  important  statement  of  Mr.  Max 
Herzberg,  President  of  the  United  Hebrew  Charities  of  Philadelphia: 

"Poverty  enters  very  little  into  the  question  of  family  desertion.  In 
other  words  men  do  not  desert  their  wives  because  of  industrial  condi- 
tions; they  very  rarely  desert  them  because  of  lack  of  unemployment.  I 
have  taken  the  trouble  for  a  number  of  years  to  gather  some  statistics  on 
the  question  of  the  causes  of  desertion,  and  particularly  with  reference  to 
the  question  of  desertion  in  so-called  periods  of  industrial  crises;  and 
taking  the  last  five  or  six  years  (prior  to  1913)  as  a  criterion,  and  the 
statistics  of  the  years  prior  to  that  will  prove  the  same  thing,  I  find  that 
in  190G  seventeen  and  one-half  per  cent  (17|%)  of  all  the  cases  that 
-  came  to  our  attention  were  due  to  lack  of  employment  or  insufficient  work, 
and  twelve  per  cent  (12%)  were  cases  of  desertion.  In  1907,  when  times 
were  getting  worse,  the  causes  of  application  for  relief  were,  nineteen  per 
cent  (19%)  for  lack  of  employment,  and  only  nine  per  cent  (9%)  were 
cases  of  family  desertion.  In  1908  which  was  almost  the  high  water  mark 
of  the  panic,  we  had  forty  per  cent  (40%)  of  applications  due  to  in- 
dustrial conditions,  and  only  nine  per  cent  (9%)  were  due  to  family 
"desertion.  In  1909  *  *  *  a  year  in  which  we  all  had  a  hard  time  to  cope 
with  conditions,  fifty  per  cent  (50%)  of  our  applications  were  due  to  lack 
of  employment,  and  only  six  per  cent  (6%)  were  due  to  family  desertion. 
This  condition  is  true  not  only  of  the  United  Hebrew  Charities  of 
Philadelphia,  but  with  other  and  similar  organizations  all  over  the  country 
*;  and  it  only  proves  the  assertion  that  I  started  with,  that  desertion 
is  not  primarily  an  economic  question."  - 

The   second  point  in  substantiation  of  the   statement  that   desertion  and 


1.  That  there  is  sonic  relation  between  the  t\vo  is  not  disputed.  Desertion  often 
follows  family  quarrels,  and  pinched  finances  are  a  fruitful  source  of  domestic  alter- 
cations. The  argument  here  is  to  the  effect  that  poverty  is  not  the  main  cause  of  deser- 
tion and  that  there  is  not  any  n<  rr.s.vrnvy  connection  between  them. 


Philadelphia  City  Club  Bulletin,  February  12,   1913,  p.  248. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  PROBLEM.  21 

poverty  are  not  necessarily  causally  related  lies  in  the  fact  that  many  of  the 
deserters  studied  were  at  work  immediately  before  their  departure.  The 
Boston  investigation  in  1901  gave  the  information  that  59.6  per  cent  of  the 
men  concerning  whom  the  facts  were  known  were  employed  at  the  time  of 
their  desertion,1  and  the  same  was  true  of  nearly  half — 270 — of»Miss  Brandt's 
574  deserters." 

Although  the  tables  of  wages  for  the  327  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic 
Relations  cases  indicate  them  to  have  been  men  of  modest  incomes,3  it 
sufficiently  demonstrates  on  the  other  hand  that  the  economic  condition  was 
not  the  basic  determinant.  All  but  seventy-three  of  the  284  whose  earnings 
were  known  were  receiving  fifteen  dollars  or  more  per  week;  seventy-two 
were  receiving  twenty-five  dollars  or  more,  of  whom  three  were  drawing 
sixty  dollars;  one,  seventy;  and  one,  a  hundred  and  ten  dollars.  Of  127 
concerning  whom  the  facts  were  known,  seventy-eight  or  61.4  per  cent,  were 
steady  and  regular  workers.4 

The  contention  that  desertion  is  not  inevitably  a  result  of  poverty  has 
yet  other  support.  This  is  the  fact  that  for  every  man  who  deserts  there 
are  many  men  just  as  grievously  burdened  in  every  way  who  do  not  desert. 
The  records  of  relief  agencies  show  the  number  of  married  couples  aided 
to  be  far  in  excess  of  deserted  wivef.5  Moreover,  a  careful  study  of  case 
records  of  deserted  families  reveals  specific  evidence  in  many  of  them 
that  there  was  no  need  for  charity  at  all  until  after  the  desertion  had  taken 
place. 

William  Bergson1"'  is  a  case  in  point.  Poverty  did  not  drive  him  to  desert 
his  family.  Besides  his  wife,  with  whom  he  had  lived  for  sixteen  years  with- 
out manifesting  any  tendency  to  desert,  there  was  no  one  to  support  but 
his  little  twelve  year  old  daughter.  His  financial  burden  was  much  less  than 
that  of  any  of  his  neighbors,  and  he  had  a  much  better  income  with  which  to 
meet  it,  for  he  owned  a  prosperous  teaming  business  of  his  own:  a  van,  a 
wagon  and  two  carts.  But  when  Bergson  came  under  the  influence  of  "the 
other  woman"  he  sold  his  business  to  the  last  cartwheel  and  used  the  proceeds 
to  finance  an  elopement  with  her. 

Neither  can  poverty  be  offered  as  the  excuse  for  Oscar  Wilkins.  His 
skill  as  a  tailor  insured  him  regular  employment,  and  recommendations 
from  employers  were  forthcoming.  Good  wages  were  accompanied  by  a  dis- 
position to  save,  and  his  bank  book  at  one  time  showed  a  balance  of  four 
hundred  dollars.  Poverty  was  not  pinching  at  the  time  of  his  desertion,  for 
he  had  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  in  the  bank  at  the  time.  This,  however, 
he  thoughtfully  withdrew  at  the  time  of  his  departure  following  a  quarrel  with 
his  wife,  thus  protecting  himself  against  immediate  privation  whatever  might 
be  said  of  her  necessity. 

In  the  light  of  all  the  evidence  the  belief  that  poverty  is  a  leading  cause 
of  desertion  appears  untenable.  The  conviction  is  compelled  that  the  relation 
between  poverty  and  the  essential  causes  of  desertion  is  a  comparatively 
incidental  one. 


1.  Zilpha  D.    Smith,   op. 

•2.  Op.   cit.,  p.    29. 

3.  Vide,  Table  IV. 

4.  Vide,  Table  III. 

5.  For  example,    from    the   respective   records   in   1915   we   may  note   the   following 
ratio  between  the  number  of  married  couples  and  deserted  wives : 

Chicago  United  Charities,  S  to  1 ;  Cook  County  Agent,  S  to  1  ;  Associated  Jewish 
Charities  of  Chicago,  7  to  1.  Of  the  five  thousand  cases  analyzed  by  Dr.  Devine  In 
Misery  and  Its  Causes,  the  ratio  is  6  to  1. 

6.  Fictitious  names  are  used  throughout. 


CHAPTER    III. 

Extent  of  Desertion. 

1— INCOMPLETENESS    OF    STATISTICAL    DATA    ON    DESERTION. 

In  all  parts  of  the  United  States  marriages  and  divorces  are  required 
to  be  publicly  recorded.  In  many  parts  of  the  country  births  and  deaths,  as 
well,  are  required  by  law  to  be  officially  registered.  Therefore  tabulation  of 
statistics  with  reference  to  them  is  a  matter  of  comparative  ease. 

With  respect  to  family  desertion,  however,  it  is  not  possible  to  obtain  data 
with  anything  like  such  completeness.  Since  the  law  does  not  require  the 
record  it  is  patent  that  many  cases  must  remain  unknown.  Only  where 
redress  is  sought  against  the  deserter  through  the  courts,  or  where  poverty 
or  misfortune  of  the  neglected  family  brings  it  into  contact  with  relief  agencies, 
or  in  some  similar  contingency,  does  desertion  become  a  matter  of  record. 

Except  in  occasional  instances  we  have  no  way  of  getting  information 
regarding  deserted  women  who,  for  various  reasons,  may  desire  to  refrain  from 
making  public  record  of  having  been  forsaken:  wives  who,  because  of  the 
disgrace  of  it  are  not  willing  to  have  their  status  known;  wives  who,  because 
of  fear  of  reprisals  of  the  recreant  husbands,  do  not  dare  to  resort  to  legal 
means  to  bring  them  to  task;  wives  who  maintain  silence  because  of  preferring 
their  absence  to  their  presence;  wives  who  for  very  loyalty  to  the  disloyal  ab- 
sent ones  shield  them  by  not  speaking;  wives  who  would  report  their  cases  if 
they  only  knew  how  to  go  about  the  perplexing  business.  How  many  of  these 
there  are  and  how  their  numbers  might  swell  the  record  we  have  no  means  of 
knowing.  We  can  only  present  fragmentary  data  at  best  from  such  sources 
as  are  available,  knowing  that  they  do  not  begin  to  indicate  the  full  extent 
to  which  desertion  permeates  our  modern  life. 

2— STATISTICS   ON    DESERTION. 

The  Municipal  Court  of  Chicago  for  the  six  years  from  December  1,  1907,  to 
November  30,  1913,  records  that  of  77,600  misdemeanor  cases  handled,  8,887 
or  11.45  per  cent,  were  desertions.1 

The  first  annual  report  of  the  Divorce  Statistician  of  Cook  County,  Ills., 
indicates  that  of  3,458  divorces  granted  for  the  year  ending  July  1,  1915,  1,045 
or  30  per  cent,  were  because  of  the  husband's  desertion.2 

The  report  of  the  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  and  Court  of 
Appeals  of  Cuyahoga  Co.,  Ohio,  (Cleveland),  is  as  follows:3 

From  July  1,  1910,  to  April  1,  1910,   (four  years,  nine  months): 

Total  number  of  divorces  granted,  all  causes 5,425 

Total  number  of  divorces   granted  because   of  absence   and  neglect 

of  husband    2,626 

Desertion  of  husband  comprised  48.40  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  report  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  the  Census  for  the  whole  ot 
the  United  States  is  as  follows:4 

From  1887  to  1906  inclusive,   (twenty  years)  : 

Total  number  of  divorces  granted,  all  causes 945,625 

Total  number  of  divorces  granted  because  of  desertion  of  husband.  .211,219 
Desertion  of  husband  comprised  22.3  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  conclusion  reached  by  the  committee  appointed  by  the  National  Con- 


1.  Seventh   Annual   Report,   p.    132. 

2.  From  the  unpublished  records  of  the  Cook  County  Clerk. 

3.  Letter,    April    15,    1915. 

4.  Special  Reports  of  the    United    States    Censns    Office:     Marriage  and  Divorce 
1867-1906,   I,    26. 


EXTENT  OF  DESERTION.  23 

ference  of  Charities  and  Correction  to  investigate  the  subject  of  family 
desertion  is  startling  enough,  but  the  findings  of  the  investigation  conducted 
during  the  course  of  this  study  indicate  that  the  ratio  they  named  is  not  too 
large  a  figure: 

"Detailed  investigation  in  several  states  has  shown  that  of  all  families 

under  the  care  of  private  charity  associations,  no  less  than  one  in  ten*  owe 

their  destitution  to  this  cause   [desertion]."1 

With  the  object  of  getting  direct  information  bearing  upon  this  point  from 
the  most  reliable  sources  available  letters  were  sent  out  to  seventy  of  the 
charity  organizations  and  relief  societies  affiliated  with  the  National  Conference 
of  Charities  and  Correction  in  sixty-six  of  the  larger  cities  in  thirty-eight 
states  of  the  Union,  and  three  cities  of  Canada.  Of  the  thirty-two  responding, 
seventeen  had  no  provision  for  recording  desertion  cases  treated  under  a  sep- 
arate classification;  one  (Dayton)  had  had  its  records  destroyed  by  flood; 
twelve  only  were  able  to  send  accurate  data  for  the  two  consecutive  years 
concerning  which  inquiry  was  made.  The  records  of  the  twelve  organizations 
showed: 

For  1913: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 31,090 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases 3,124 

Desertions  comprised  10  per  cent  of  the  total. 

For  1914: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 41,156 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases 3,835 

Desertions  comprised  9.31  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  most  complete  data  available  for  a  considerable  period  of  time  is 
reported  by  the  Department  of  Poor  Relief  of  Cook  County,  Ills.,  (Cook  County 
Agent).  The  annual  reports  of  this  Department  for  the  period  from  December 
1,  1902,  to  November  30,  1915,  show  the  following  for  the  thirteen  years: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 123,626 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases. 16,134 

Desertions  comprised  13.05  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  records  afforded  by  the  United  Charities  of  Chicago  for  the  period 
from  the  reorganization  of  the  society  October  1,  1909,  to  September  30,  1915, 
are  complete  and  show  the  following  for  the  six  years: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 88,851 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases 9,065 

Desertions  comprised  10.2  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  Associated  Charities  of  Washington  have  a  record  on  this  point 
from  1896  to  1904  inclusive.  Their  figures  as  reported  by  Mr.  Wm.  H. 
Baldwin  are  as  follows  for  the  nine  year  period: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 22,549 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases 1,603 

Desertions  comprised  7.1  per  cent  of  the  total. - 

The  Boston  Associated  Charities  have  a  record  covering  five  years: 

"In  every  year  between  1889  and  1893,  and  again  in  1899,  the  new 
families  becoming  known  to  us  were  classified  as  to  conjugal  condition. 
The  percentage  of  deserted  wives  continued  practically  the  same,  between 
8.75  and  10  per  cent,  the  average  being  9.33  per  cent." 3 

Buffalo  reports  its  desertions  from  1905  to  1909  to  have  ranged  between  10 

1.  "Resolutions  on  Desertion  and  Extradition,"  Proceedings  of  the  National  Con- 
ference of  Charities  and  Correction,  1905,  p.   617. 

2.  Family  Desertion  and  Xon-support  Laws,  p.  7.      (Published  in  the  volume  with 
Miss  Brandt's  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four  Deserters  and  Their  Families.) 

A  letter  from  the  Associated  Charities  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  date  of  April  10,  1916, 
states  that  the  Society  is  not  able  to  supply  desertion  statistics  subsequent  to  1904. 

3.  Zilpha  D.   Smith,  op.  cit.,  p.  3. 


24  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

and  14  per  cent,1  and  Detroit  reports  its  desertion  cases  for  1909  to  be  15 
per  cent  of  the  total.- 

The  Charity  Organization  Society  of  New  York  "keeps  no  record  of  the 
types  of  cases"  that  -come  under  its  care,3  but  its  secretary,  Dr.  E.  T.  Devine, 
in  his  analysis  of  five  thousand  cases  of  misery  coming  under  the  care  of  the 
society  during  the  two  years  ending  September  30,  1908,  found  ten  per  cent  of 
them  due  to  the  desertion  of  the  husband.4 

The  Associated  Charities  of  Dayton,  while  unable  to  give  exact  figures  on 
account  of  the  flood  of  1914  having  destroyed  all  resords,  was  nevertheless 
able  to  state  definitely  that  desertions  for  the  year  ending  September  30,  1914, 
represented  12  per  cent  of  the  total.5 

The  Brooklyn  Bureau  of  Charities  writes:  "A  special  study  shows  this 
[desertion]  to  be  about  one-tenth  of  all  cases."  e 

The  Charity  Organization  Society  of  Indianapolis  showed  a  desertion  per- 
centage of  24.5  in  1914;  7  and  Minneapolis  was  not  far  behind  this  record  in 

1913,  with  a  mark  of  17.2  per  cent.8 

The  Associated  Charities  of  Winnipeg,  the  only  one  of  the  leading  Canadian 
organizations  to  report  definitely,  found  desertion  to  comprise  11.2  per  cent  of 
all  its  charity  cases  in  1913.9 

A  close  record  kept  by  the  Jewish  Aid  Society  of  Chicago  from  1912  to  191B 
gave  the  following  for  the  four  year  period: 

Total  number  of  cases  aided 11,651 

Total  number  of  desertion  cases 1,083 

Desertions  comprised  9.3  per  cent  of  the  total. 

The  annual  reports   of  the  Federated  Jewish  Charities   of  Baltimore   for 

1913  show  9.6  per  cent  of  its  cases  due  to  desertion;    in   1914  this  increased 
to  15.8  per  cent. 

The  United  Hebrew  Charities  of  New  York  City  for  the  two  years  ending 
September  30,  1908,  reported  11.6  per  cent  of  all  cases  to  be  desertion  cases.10 

The  annual  report  of  the  Society  of  Hebrew  Charities  of  Philadelphia  for 

1914  records  a  desertion  percentage  of  13.1.    The  Federated  Jewish  Charities  of 
Boston  for  the  same  year  report  10  per  cent.11 

Of  the  twenty-four  relief  societies  in  fifteen  countries  abroad  to  which 
inquiries  were  sent  only  six  returned  answers:  Berlin,  Geneva,  Adelaide, 
Glasgow,  Edinburgh  and  Belfast.  Only  three  of  these  were  able  to  give  statistics 
regarding  desertion. 

Glasgow,  through  the  Clerk  of  its  Parish  Council,  reports  desertions  to 
have  "reached  their  highest  points  in  1901  with  11.2  per  cent,  and  in  1903, 
with  11.4  per  cent,  since  which  there  has  been  a  steady  decrease  in  the  per- 
centage to  7.1  which  has  obtained  for  the  past  two  years,  [viz.,  1911  and 
1912]."12 

The  Benevolent  and  Strangers'  Friend  Society  of  Adelaide,  Australia,  re- 
ported that  of  its  cases  in  1913,  6.8  per  cent  were  desertions;  in  1914  it 
dropped  to  3.1  per  cent.13 

The  Edinburgh  Parish  Council  reported  14.58  per  cent  in  1913,  and  16.9 
per  cent  in  1914,  of  its  new  applications  as  being  from  deserted  wives.14 

1.  M.  D.  Waldman.  "Family  Desertion,"  Proceedings  of  the  Jewish  National  Con- 
ference of  Charities  and  Correction,  1910,  p.  55. 

2.  Ibid. 

3.  Letter,  February  27,  Iftlo. 

4.  Misery  and  Its  Causes,  p.   210. 

5.  Letter.   Frln-ua'-y   '11.    1!H.~ 

6.  Letter,  March  4,  1915. 

7.  Letter,  March  10,  1915. 

8.  Letter,  February  26,   1915. 

9.  Letter,  March  3,  1915. 

10.  M.  D.  Waldman,  op.  cit.t  p.   54. 

11.  Letter,  July  14,   1915. 

11'.      Jas.  R.   Motion,   Wife  and  Family  Desertion,  p.   4. 

13.  Letter,  April  8,  1915. 

14.  Abstracts    of   the   Accounts   of   the   Parish   Council   of   Ertinbnrc/h     1913     n     "9  • 

1914,  p.   32. 


EXTENT  OF  DESERTION. 


25 


TABLE  V   (a) 


STATISTICS  ON  DESERTION. 
Organizations  Affiliated  with   The  National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction. 


City. 


Year. 


1.  Indianapolis    1914 

_'.  Minneapolis    1913 

-3.  Detroit*     1909 

4.  Chicago    1913 

5.  Daytonf     1914 

S.  Winnipeg-,    Man.§    1913 

7.  Chicago     1914 

8.  Chicago     1912 

9.  Chicago    1910 

lew   York    1907-'08 

11.  Brooklyn     1914 

12.  Brooklyn     1913 

Buffalo      1913 

14,  Washington  |    1901-'02 

la.  Boston!!     1889-'93 

16.  Washington      1900 

17.  Indianapolis    1913 

18.  Buffalo     1914 

19.  Chicago    1915 

20.  New  Haven    1913 

i'l.  Richmond     1913 

22.  Columbus      191? 

23.  Washington     1898 

24.  Washington     1899" 

25.  New    Haven    1914 

26.  Columbus      1914 

27.  Washington     1904 

.ittle   Rock    1914 

?S.  Minneapolis    1914 

Richmond     1914 

Washington     1903 

'.',-..  Washington     1897 

33.  St.   Louis    1913 

.14.  Winnipeg,    Man.§     1914 

35.  Spokane     1914 

36.  Little   Rock    1913 

Spokane     1913 

38.  Philadelphia 1913 

•S9.  St.    Louis    1914 

40.  Washington     1896 


Total :  All 
Cases  Aided. 

2,274 

1,524 

13,017 

785 

16,369 

15,184 

9,582 

5,000 

6,425 

5,237 

666 

4.:,  7  7 

1,848 
1,393 

913 

22,105 

1,379 

623 
1,276 
2,115 
2,473 
2,357 
1,787 
3,898 
1,493 
2,381 

771 
3,555 
1,919 
3,363 
1,405 
1,228 
1,378 

867 
6,664 
4,847 
2,164 


*  M.  D.  Waldman,  op.  cit. 

t  Letter,  February  27,  1915. 

|  Twenty  months  only. 

II  Zilpha  D.  Smith,  op.  cit.,  p.  3. 

I  Canadian  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction. 


Total :  Percentage 

Desertions,  of  Desertions. 

559  24.5 

263  17.2 

15.0 
.   12.4 
12.0 
11.2 
10.6 
10.5 
10.1 
10.0 
10.0 
10.0 
10.0 
9.3 
9.3 
9.2 
8.4 
8.1 


1.740 

1,609 

998 

499 

642 

523 

66 


170 

118 

74 

1,790 

110 

49 

90 

160 

182 

166 

125 

266 

102 

15!» 

50 

234 

108 

174 

7" 

49 

53 

29 

211 

149 

56 


7.9 
7.9 
7.6 
7.5 
7.3 
7.0 
7.0 
6.8 
6.8 
6.7 
6.5 
6.5 
5.6 
5.1 
5.0 
3.9 
3.8 
3.3 
3.1 
3.0 
2.6 


26  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 


TABLE  V    (b). 

STATISTICS   ON    DESERTION. 

Organizations  Affiliated  with  The  Jewish  National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Cor- 
rection. 

Total :  All             Total :  Percentage 
City                                                         Year.           Cases  Aided.       Desertions,  of  Desertions. 

1.  Baltimore     1914                        417  66                   15.8 

2.  Philadelphia    1914                     1,114  146                   13.1 

3.  Philadelphia*     1906  12.0 

4.  New   Yorkt    1907-'08  11.6 

5.  Chicago     1912                     2,257  262                   11.6 

6.  Chicago     1913                     2,304  255                   11.0 

7.  Boston     1914                         546  55                   10.0 

8.  Baltimore     1913                     1,934  186                     9.6 

9.  Chicago     1914                     3,056  285                     9.3 

10.  New    York    1913                     3,996  366                     9.1 

11.  Philadelphia*     1907  9.0 

12.  Philadelphia*     1908  9.0 

13       St.    Louis    1914                        369  28                     7.5- 

14.  New   York    1914                     4,285  311                     7.2 

15.  Chicago     1915                     4,034  281                     7.0 

16.  Philadelphia*     1909  6.0 

17       Boston 1913                         669  39                     5.8 

18.     San   Francisco    1913                     1,754  59 

•Philadelphia  City  Club  Bulletin,  February  12,  1913,  p.  248. 
tM.  D.  Waldman,   op  cit. 


TABLE  V    (c). 

STATISTICS   ON   DESERTION. 
Department  of  Poor  Relief,  Cook  County,  III.* 


Year. 
1903  

Total  :  All 
Cases  Aided 

6  058 

Total  : 
Desertions,  c 

792 

Percentage 
)f  Desertions. 

13  0 

1904  

7  650 

959 

12  5 

1905  

7  874 

939 

11  9 

1906 

5  509 

903 

16  4 

1907... 

5  431 

855 

15  7 

1908  

11  714 

1  299 

11  0 

1909 

9  303 

1  290 

13  8 

1910 

....         8  191 

1  263 

15  4 

1911  

10  654 

1  566 

14  7 

1912 

12  635 

1  805 

14  3 

1913            

9  487 

1  492 

15  7 

1914|   

11,867 

1  379 

11  6 

1915 

17  253 

1  592 

9  2 

Total     123,626  16,134  13.05 

*From  the  Anmial  Reports  of  the  Cook  County  Agent. 

fAnnual  report  for  1914   not  published.     These  figures  are  quoted  from  the  origi 
nal  records.  » 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Social  Significance  of  Desertion 

Desertion,  like  all  other  human  actions,  must  be  judged  in  the  light  of  its 
consequences.  No  abstract  criterion  of  morality  may  be  called  in  as  a  standard 
by  which  to  appraise  it.  The  results  of  desertion  are  of  practical  consequence 
to  us.  In  its  last  analysis  desertion  must  stand  approved  or  condemned 
solely  in  the  light  of  the  fruit  it  yields. 

1— EFFECTS  UPON  THE  FAMILY. 

Wherever  the  subject  of  human  unhappiness  is  discussed  the  unfortunate 
lot  of  the  widow  and  orphan  does  not  fail  of  mention.  But  the  lot  of  the 
widow  and  orphan  by  desertion  is  often  a  great  deal  more  difficult  and  per- 
plexing than  that  of  those  for  whose  estate  death  is  responsible.  Where  ade- 
quate means  of  support  are  not  at  hand  the  same  difficult  problem  of  making 
a  living  confronts  both.  The  task  is  embittered  for  the  deserted  wife  and 
mother  by  the  knowledge  that  the  one  to  whom  she  has  the  legal  right  (but 
not  the  power)  to  turn  for  support  is  still  alive. 

The  wife  who  secures  a  divorce  frequently  has  her  future  living  partly 
guaranteed  from  alimony  or  definite  financial  settlement  legally  arranged.  Pen- 
sions from  various  sources  are  frequently  available  for  the  widow.  Both  of 
these  are  denied  the  woman  who  is  deserted.  The  former  is  withheld  by  the 
nature  of  the  case,  the  latter  oftentimes  by  specific  enactment  or  policy  of  dis- 
crimination against  her.  Those  who  administer  mothers'  pensions  are  fearful 
lest  an  extension  of  them  to  deserted  women  shall  prove  an  incentive  to  other 
husbands  to  desert.  Not  infrequently  the  agencies  to  which  widows  may  freely 
and  without  question  turn  for  support  deny  aid  to  deserted  women  whose  need 
is  just  as  great,  on  the  ground  that  the  husband  is  still  living  and  should 
provide  for  his  own. 

In  some  cases  the  unhappiness  and  misery  which  follows  the  husband's 
departure  may  be  reckoned  as  a  part  of  the  just  retribution  visited  upon  the 
wife  for  her  share  of  the  responsibility  in  causing  it;  but,  if  we  may  take 
Miss  Brandt's  conclusions  in  the  matter,  this  cannot  fairly  be  said  in  the 
majority  of  cases.  Of  her  574  desertions  she  says: 

"In  245  cases,  almost  two-thirds  of  the  386  for  which  explanations 
were  available,  the  chief  responsibility  for  the  disruption  of  the  home 
seems  to  rest  on  the  recreant  husband;  in  41  cases,  about  12  per  cent,  it 
seems  to  have  been  chiefly  the  wife's  fault;  and  in  fifty-two,  over  13  per 
cent,  man  and  wife  seem  to  have  been  equally  to  blame  ,and  in  the  other 
forty-three,  almost  12  per  cent,  the  immediate  responsibility  lay  in  circum- 
stances out  of  the  control  of  both."1 

One  of  the  most  tragic  features  of  desertion  thus  appears  in  the  fact  that 
so  large  a  number  of  those  who  suffer  most  are  persons  who  have  no  part 
in  causing  it.  Information  as  to  the  number  of  persons  involved  by  desertion 
is  available  only  here  and  there: 

According  to  Miss  Smith's  report  in  Boston  in  1901: 

228  deserters  left  228  wives  and  524  children  under  fourteen  years.2 

According  to  the  committee's  report  in  Philadelphia  in  1903: 

208  deserters  left  208  wives  and  537  children  under  fourteen  years.3 

According  to   Miss   Brandt's   schedules: 


1.  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four  Deserters  and  their  Families,  p.   39. 

2.  Deserted  Wives  and  Deserting  Husbands,  p.  7. 

3.  Report  of  the  Special  Committee  on  Wife  Desertion,  p.  2. 


28  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

574  deserters  left  574  wives  and  1,665  children  of  whom  80.3  per  cent  were 

under  fourteen  years  of  age.1 
According  to  the   Stock  Yards'  United  Charities   report,   October  1,   1910,  to 

October  1,  1913: 
603   deserters  left  603  wives  and  1,178  children.2 

In  six  of  the  327  cases  from  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  the 

children  were  grown;  of  the  remainder: 
321  deserters  left  321  wives  and  479  children. 
In  220  of  the  1,592  desertion  cases  aided  by  the  Cook  County  Agent  in  1915 

there  were  no  young   children;    of  the  remainder: 
1,372  deserters  left  1,372  wives  and  3,631  children  under  fourteen  years.3 

Out  of  these  3,306  cases  where  records  are  available,  8,014  children  were 
involved,  most  of  them  under  fourteen  years  of  age.  Including  the  3,306  wives 
it  appears  that  a  total  of  11,320  persons  were  condemned  to  all  the  wretched- 
ness which  follows  in  the  wake  of  desertion;  and  apparently  most  of  them  may 
in  no  sense  be  considered  as  reaping  a  penalty  for  their  sins. 

These  3,306  cases  show  an  average  of  2.42  children  per  family.  This  is 
smaller  than  that  of  the  population  at  large,  as  is  to  be  expected  in  view  of 
the  abbreviated  term  of  married  life  together,  but  sufficiently  large  to  furnish 
an  urgent  argument  against  indifference  to  the  fact  of  desertion. 

The  Juvenile  Protective  Association  of  Cincinnati  reports  as  a  result  of  its 
investigation  for  the  year  ending  September  30,  1913,  that  2,861  children  were 
deserted  during  the  twelve  months,  "over  twice  the  total  number  of  pupils 
attending  our  largest  public  school." 4  This  number  is  5.13  per  cent  of  the 
entire  school  attendance  reported  for  Cincinnati  by  the  census  of  1910. 

A — Demoralization  of  its  Members. 

In  some  cases  outdoor  relief  is  absolutely  refused  to  deserted  families,  or 
else  granted  under  conditions  which  make  it  virtually  a  refusal.  In  such  cases 
the  family  may  be  broken  up  and  the  disintegration  which  began  with  the 
father's  departure  be  made  complete  by  the  scattering  of  the  members  who 
are  left.  The  wholly  dependent  members  of  the  group,  and  sometimes  all  are, 
may  be  placed  in  institutions,  because  under  their  altered  economic  status  no 
means  are  available  for  going  ahead  as  a  family. 

Even  where  outdoor  relief  is  provided  a  host  of  demoralizing  influences 
are  at  work  among  members  of  the  family. 

Physical  discomfort  is  to  be  expected.  Wherever  the  husband  prior  to  his 
disappearance  has  contributed  in  any  degree  to  his  family's  support,  grudgingly 
or  irregularly  though  it  may  have  been,  a  lower  standard  of  living  must  fol- 
low withdrawal  of  his  help.  This  means  a  lower  degree  of  physical  comfort, 
less  to  eat,  less  to  keep  them  warm,  and  the  lessened  vitality  which  would 
naturally  follow.  Where  the  husband  has  been  the  sole  support  it  means 
abject  poverty. 

Encouragement  to  dependency  naturally  follows.  If  opportunities  for  self- 
support  are  not  forthcoming  outside  relief  must  be  obtained,  and  the  persons 
affected  become  enrolled  among  the  paupers.  The  statistics  already  given D 
indicate  the  extent  which  this  reaches  in  the  field  of  outdoor  relief.  / 

The  reports  from  institutions  giving  indoor  relief  are  fully  as  depressing. 
Mrs.  Louis  C.  Madeira,  vice-chairman  of  the  Joint  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Children's  Bureau  of  Philadelphia,  estimates  15  per  cent  to  be  a  "fair  propor- 
tion" of  the  more  than  ten  thousand  children  cared  for  by  charity  in  Phila- 


1.  Op.    cit.,  p.    15. 

2.  Compile^  from   the   files,    Chicago  United   Charities. 

3.  Annu^f  Report,   1915. 

4.  "The  Desertion   Problem,"   an  unpublished   report,   November   5,    1913. 
vide,  Chap.   iii. 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE.  29 

delphia  institutions  who  are  there  because  of  desertion.1  A.  Chevalier,  Di- 
rector of  Municipal  Assistance,  Montreal,  finds  from  figures  kept  through  a 
series  of  years,  that  thirty-six  out  of  every  one  hundred  children  in  charity 
institutions  of  that  city  are  there  because  they  have  either  deserting  or  non- 
supporting  fathers.2  "From  January  1,  1912,  to  January  1,  1913,  the  Cincinnati 
Orphan  Asylum,  out  of  a  total  number  of  105  children  received  twenty-nine  as 
a  result  of  the  desertion  of  the  father." 3  Twenty-six  and  one-half  per  cent 
of  the  1,149  delinquent  children  and  neglected  children  appearing  before  the 
Juvenile  Court  of  Seattle  in  1912  "were  from  homes  broken  up  by  desertion 
and  divorce."  4  "Twenty-five  per  cent  of  the  commitments  of  children  in  New 
York  City  are  attributed  to  desertion."  5  There  are  in  New  York  approximately 
twenty-three  thousand  dependent  children  cared  for  as  public  charges  in  private 
institutions.1  If  Miss  Brandt's  statement  is  correct  New  York  must  care  for 
some  five  thousand  seven  hundred  and  fifty  deserted  children  in  her  homes, 
asylums  and  industrial  schools  each  year. 

The  files  of  the  Juvenile  Court  of  Cook  County;  Ills.,  for  the  eleven  years, 
1904  to  1914  inclusive,  show  that  21,608  dependent  children  have  appeared 
before  it.  From  December  1,  1912,  to  December  1,  1914,  a  record  was  kept 
of  the  number  whose  fathers  had  deserted.  Of  the  4,403  during  those  two 
years,  791  or  18  per  cent  had  been  abandoned  by  their  fathers.  If  the  same 
percentage  is  atoplied  to  the  eleven  years  it  will  appear  that  3,889  dependent 
children  of  deseVting  fathers  were  taken  before  the  court  during  that  time. 

Encouragemmt  to  delinquency  is  but  a  step  from  dependency.  Not  only 
beggary  but  thefAand  other  crimes  easily  become  contributions  from  the  fam- 
ily to  society.  Economic  necessity  may  partly  account  for  delinquency. 

"As  a  rul&  the  father  is  better  able  to  provide  for  the  material  needs 
of  the  childrenVhan  the  mother,  and  as  a  result  of  this  the  children  are  not 
obliged  to  attempt  to  do  anything  in  the  way  of  increasing  the  household 
income  at  a  very  tender  age.  Mothers,  on  the  other  hand,  in  order  to  make 
both  ends  meet,  are  very  often  compelled  to  make  their  children  earn  a 
little  in  the  streets  and  public  places,  and  the  children  are  in  consequence, 
exposed  to  temptations  which  bring  them  within  range  of  the  criminal 
law."  ' 

ut  economic  necessity  cannot  account  for  allfc 

"The  father,  as  a  rule,  has  more  authority  over  the  children  than  has 
the  mother.     Many  of  the  fatherless  children  committed   [to  institutions] 
are  sent  there  because  the  mother  has  lost  all  control  over  them.     These 
children  are  found  in  the  streets  begging,  or  in  the  presence  of  criminals 
and  the  mother  is  actually  unable  to  restrain  them.     The  father,  on  the  \ 
other  hand"     *     *     *     would  be  able     *     *     *     "to  prevent  his  children/ 
from  associating  with  evil  companions  and  falling  into  vagrant  habits."  8 

The  files  of  the  Juvenile  Court  of  Cook  County  for  the  eleven  years,  1904  to 
1914  inclusive,  record  26,616  delinquent  children  as  having  appeared  before  it. 
Of  this  number,  8.918,  more  than  a  third,  have  been  committed  to  reforma- 
tories. The  intensive  studies  of  delinquent  children  made  by  Misses  Brecken- 
ridge  and  Abbott,  (based  upon  741  cases  taken  from  this  court),  show  that" 
eight  per ^jn^jyyyjgjjnflnjeafgjy^  by  their  fathers.9  Applying 

this  ratioMt  woula  mean  that  at  least  27T  ^delinquent  deserted  children  have 


j.     Philadelphia  City  Club  Bulletin,  February  12,  1913,  p.  245. 

2.     Proceedings   of   the    Thirteenth   Canadian    Conference   of   Charities   and   Correc- 
tion, 1912,  ] 

3      Juvenile  Protective  Association,  "The  Desertion  Problem." 
Annual  Report,  1912,  p.  9. 
Lillian  Brandt,  op.  cit.,  p.  10. 

Department  of  Public  Charities.  New  York  City,  letter,  June  21,  1916. 
W.  Douglas  Morrison,  Juvenile  Offenders,  pp.  139-40. 
Ibid. 
The  Delinquent  Child  and  the  Home,  p.   92. 


30  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

passed  through  this  court  in  a  little  more  than  a  decade;  and  that  more  than 
seven  hundred  of  them  were  committed  for  offenses  which  they  might  have 
escaped  had  their  living  fathers  fulfilled  their  duties. 

Probably  only  a  negligible  proportion  of  women  leading  lives  of  prostitu- 
tion have  been  driven  thither  by  reason  of  having  been  deserted.  Dependable 
statistics  upon  this  point  would  be  exceedingly  difficult  to  obtain,  since  they 
would  have  to  be  based  upon  the  unsupported  statements  of  the  women  them- 
selves. But  the  fact  that  an  occasional  case  is  found  of  a  woman,  apparently 
moral  up  to  the  time  of  her  husband's  departure,  entering  a  life  of  vice  when 
left  alone,  shows  that  this  may  very  properly  be  considered  as  one  of  the  results 
of  desertion.  The  Vice  Commission  of  Chicago  regarded  deserted  women  as 
one  of  the  sources  of  supply  of  professional  prostitutes.  In  its  report,  The 
Social  Evil  in  Chicago,  published  in  1911,  the  Commission  made  an  analysis 
of  thirty  cases  with  reference  to  the  original  cause  of  entering  the  life,  in 
which  two  of  the  thirty  were  reported  as  having  done  so  because  of  having 
been  deserted  by  faithless-  husbands.1 

A  report  of  an  investigation  of  commercialized  prostitution  in  New  York 
City  is  made  in  a  publication  of  the  Bureau  of  Social  Hygiene,  by  Katherine 
Bement  Davis,  at  that  time  Superintendent  of  the  New  York  State  Reformatory 
for  Women  at  Bedford  Hills: 

Of  671  prostitutes  studied  at  the  Bedford  Reformatory,  55  were  married  women. 

Of  the  55,  eight   (14.5  per  cent)   gave  their  husbands'  desertion  as  the  reason 
for  entering  the  life.2 

Of  492  prostitutes  studied  at  other  institutions,  115  were  married  women. 

Of  the  115,  twelve  (10.4  per  cent)  gave  their  husbands'  desertion  as  the  reason 
for  entering  the  life.3 

Of   1,436    street   prostitutes    studied,    213   were   married   women. 

Of  the  213,  thirty-four    (16.0  per  cent)    gave  their  husbands'   desertion  as   the 
reason   for  entering  the  life.4 

"A  woman  deserted  for  long  periods  by  her  husband  is  in  a  very  help- 
less position,  especially  if  she  has  a  family  depending  upon  her,  and  while 
a  widow  is  an  object  of  sympathy  and  of  friendly  help  and  guidance,  the 
deserted  wife  is  more  often  despised  and  blamed.  'The  'grass  widow'  as  she 
is  generally  described,  is  looked  upon  as  fair  game  for  men  of  lustful  in- 
clinations, and  this  accounts  for  the  number  leading  immoral  lives.  The 
desertion  itself  drives  her  frequently  to  intemperance,  immorality  and 
i  sloth." '" 

Deficient  development  of  children,  in  addition  to  delinquency  and  depend- 
ency, is  almost  certain.  If  the  children  are  too  young  to  appear  on  the  street 
and  encounter  its  harmful  influences,  (and  they  must  be  young,  indeed,  for 
this  to  be  the  case),  they  suffer  moral  damage  where  the  mother  is  forced 
to  leave  them  and  go  to  work,  by  being  deprived  of  her  training. 

"The  enforced  absence  of  the  mother  in  the  factory  or  workshop  almost 
entirely  deprives  the  family  of  the  benefits  of  maternal  supervision  and 
maternal  affection.  The  mother  sees  comparatively  little  of  the  children, 
and  is  therefore  apt  to  lose  some  of  the  self-sacrificing  devotion  of  mother- 
hood; whilst  the  children  see  just  as  little  of  the  mother  and  often  grow 
up  without  the  hallowing  and  constraining  influences  of  maternal  love.  A 
life  of  this  kind  is  full  of  peril  to  the  young."0 


l.  Pp.  166,  168. 

•1.  G.   J.   Kneolnncl.   Cnnmu  n •iulir.rd  Prostitution  in   Neiv   York   City,  Table   XXIII 
p.   225. 

3.  Ibid.,   Table   XL,   p.    241. 

4.  Ibid.,  Table   XLVIII.   p.   249. 

5.  Jas.  R.  Motion,  Wife  and  Family  Desertion:  an  inquirii  into  its  causes,  pp.  18-19. 

6.  W.   Douglas  Morrison,   op.  cit.,  pp.   139-40. 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE.  31 

The  impoverished  condition  of  the  family  demands  that  they  shall  go  to 
work  as  soon  as  an  age  is  reached  when  they  can.  Physically  under-nourished 
to  start  with,  they  are  subjected  to  all  the  harmful  effects  of  child  labor: 
weakened  constitutions,  lowered  vitality,  absence  of  recreation,  limited  educa- 
tional opportunities  both  vocational  and  cultural.  They  are  forced  immaturely 
into  the  ranks  of  labor,  and  unskilled  labor  at  that,  and  are  thereby  condemned 
to  a  condition  of  economic,  moral,  social  and  physical  inferiority  from  which 
escape  is  difficult. 

"The  child  thrust  prematurely  into  the  factory,  store,  or  mine  is 
dwarfed  in  his  moral  development.  The  constant  association  with  adults 
and  the  equally  constant  touch  with  the  practical,  bread-and-butter  side  of 
life  tends  to  develop  prematurely  the  adult  view  of  life.  The  youthful 
wage-earner  becomes  a  man,  while,  for  normal  development  he  should  still 
be  a  child.  The  tendency  in  the  home  of  wage-earning  children  is  toward 
relaxation  of  parental  discipline.  The  child  wage-earner  often  loses  his 
respect  for  parental  authority.  He  feels  that  his  abilitv  to  earn  money 
places  him  in  a  position  of  independence  of  parental  guidance.  The  child 
worker  in  the  plastic  adolescent  oeriod  often  hears  much  foul  language 
and  is  frequently  brought  into  touch  with  various  immoral  influences.  Fac- 
tory conditions  are  often  such  that  the  child  worker  is  in  great  danger 
of  moral  contamination.  *  *  *  Child  labor  often  leads  to  gross  immoral- 
ity. The  overworked  child  early  forms  the  habit  of  drinking  intoxicating 
liquors.  The  monotony  of  his  life  leads  him  to  seek  the  forms  of  amuse- 
ment which  excite  and  deerrade.  Venereal  diseases  are  often  unusually 
prevalent  amonsr  working  children  in  factory  towns."1 

Lowered  ideals  of  marriage  and  family  life  are  a  natural  outcome  of 
desertion.  This  is  an  ill  effect  of  desertion  which  is  cumulative.  Higher  ideals 
ran  hardlv  be  expected  of  the  children  than  are  found  in  the  parents.  They 
in  turn  will  pass  on  to  their  children  low  ideals  of  marriage  and  citizenship, 
learned  in  so  uncompromising  a  school:  and  they  to  theirs.  Children  who 
have  witnessed  such  expressions  of  marital  infelicity  in  their  own  homes 
cannot  have  a  high  regard  for  the  union  of  man  and  wife  when  the  matter 
comes  personally  to  them.  It  is  not  improbable  that  they  will  come  to  regard 
marriage  as  a  matter  of  personal  convenience,  a  transient  estate,  a  bond  to 
be  shuffled  off  if  it  becomes  for  them,  in  turn,  a  trifle  irksome. 

Tlie  -una-ncliored  luis'band.  Great  as  is  the  demoralization  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  family  left  behind,  frequentlv  the  husband  himself  is  the  one  to 
suffer  the  most  in  demoralizing:  effects.  His  original  delinquency  of  deserting 
his  family  gives  rise  to  other  forms  of  delinnuencv.  Both  purse  and  time  are 
freed  from  family  demands,  however  small.  Homeless,  unattached,  his  freedom 
to  come  and  go  leads  him  to  saloons  and  vicious  resorts  and  harmful 
companionships  with  their  familiar  results.  His  entire  income  is  free  to 
use  on  himself,  and  a  part  of  it  will  be  wastefullv  if  not  injuriously  em- 
ployed. He  is  released  from  the  restraining  influence  which  even  an  un- 
nleasant  home  would  in  some  decree  exercise,  and  so  becomes  fertile  ground 
for  criminal  impulses.  The  part  he  Dlays  as  a  rolling  stone  makes  for 
greater  instability  of  character  and  weakens  his  ability  to  resist  damaging 
influences.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  occasion  of  his  desertion  the  very 
fart  of  his  yielding  to  the  stimulus  has  weakened  him  and  made  him  less 
able  to  resist  again:  at  the  same  time  it  has  placed  nim  in  a  position  peculi- 
arly exposed  to  further  opportunities  for  vice  and  crime. 

B — Relief   from    the    Burden    of    an    Unhappy    Family    Life. 

Because  a  statement  of  its  social  significance  would  be  incomplete  with- 
out it.  the  fact  must  be  mentioned  that  the  immediate  effects  of  desertion 
are  sometimes  beneficial.  To  the  overworked  wife  and  mother  upon  whom 
falls  the  responsibility  of  making  a  living  the  presence  of  a  shiftless  or 
incompetent  husband  who  is  also  depending  upon  her  for  support  may  be  a 
burden  she  would  gladly  have  removed.  His  is  one  more  mouth  to  feed, 


1.     P.  T.  Carlton.  History  and  Problems  of  Organized   "Labor,  pp.   399-400. 


32  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

and  his  example  is  a  harmful  one  to  the  children.  Or  he  may  be  posi- 
tively vicious,  given  to  drunken  brawls  in  which  he  abuses  his  family.  Such 
a  home  is  better  off  when  he  departs,  and  his  return  may  be  the  greatest 
calamity  which  could  befall.  When  incompatibility  of  temperament  is  ex- 
treme the  relief  may  be  mutual. 

This  must  not  be  understood  as  an  attempt  to  justify  desertion.  There 
are.  as  our  laws  recognize,  conditions  under  which  wedded  life  together  be- 
comes impossible.  For  such  cases  provision  is  made  in  divorce  and  legal 
separation.  These,  and  not  desertion,  should  be  employed  as  the  way  out. 

2— EFFECTS     UPON     SOCIETY. 
A — Financial    Cost. 

Only  a  very  narrow  or  a  very  selfish  mind  would  find  in  the  financial 
incubus  which  desertion  imposes  upon  society  the  largest  reason  for  desiring 
to  eliminate  it.  Yet  we  are  justified  in  observing  that  if  there  were  no 
other  reason  than  this,  the  actual  money  saving  to  the  community  resulting 
from  its  elimination  would  be  ample  reason  for  trying  to  do  away  with  it. 

Statistics  as  to  the  actual  financial  burden  which  attends  desertion  are 
still  more  limited  than  data  as  to  its  extent,  but  those  which  are  available 
are  significant. 

(a)     OUTDOOR  RELIEF: 

Only  a  few  charity  organization  societies  have  an  accounting  system 
which  permits  an  accurate  statement  of  the  separate  expenditures  for  de- 
sertion cases  only.  In  fact,  of  the  seventy  societies  affiliated  with  the  Na- 
tional Conference  of  Charities  and  Corrections  to  which  separate  requests  for 
this  information  were  sent,  only  three  attempted  to  give  it  at  all  accurately. 
Buffalo  found  its  desertion  budget  in  1913  to  be  6.13  per  cent  of  the  whole; 
in  1914,  8.1  per  cent.1  Columbus,  in  1913,  expended  6.7  per  cent  of  its 
funds  for  desertion;  in  1914,  6.1  per  cent.2  Omaha,  in  1913,  gave  16.2  per 
cent  of  the  total  to  desertion;  4.3  per  cent  in  1914.3 

New  Haven  writes:  "About  one-fourth  expended  goes  to  desertion."4 
Minneapolis:  "Fully  33  per  cent  of  1914  expenditures  were  for  deserted 
wives,  but  this  is  only  a  guess." 5 

Spokane  writes:  "The  amount  expended  for  desertion  cannot  be  ac- 
curately figured  but  it  will  bear  about  the  same  proportion  to  the  total 
expenditure  as  the  number  of  desertion  cases  to  the  whole  number  of  cases."  6 
With  the  exception  of  those  societies  which  have  a  definite  policy  of  dis- 
crimination against  deserted  women  this  might  seem  a  fair  generalization 
to  apply  to  desertion  relief  as  a  whole.  Mr.  Ralph  J.  Reed,  Superintendent 
of  the  Stock  Yards  District  of  the  United  Charities  of  Chicago,  points  out, 
however,  that  this  may  very  easily  be  an  understatement  of  the  amount. 
Judging  by  the  experience  of  his  own  office,  deserted  families  need  help  for 
a  longer  period  of  time  on  the  average  than  other  cases.  Thus,  the  amount 
expended  for  them  is  by  no  means  less  than  the  percentage  which  the  number 
of  desertions  bears  to  the  whole  number  of  cases  and  is  probably  more, 
because  longer  continued.7 

More  light  is  thrown  upon  the  question  by  the  reports  of  the  Jewish  charity 
societies,  which  are  frequently  more  satisfactory  in  the  keeping  of  records 
concerning  desertion  than  are  the  Gentile  societies.  The  United  Hebrew 
Charities  of  New  York  in  1914  expended  7.85  per  cent  of  their  budget,  or 

1.  Letter,  February  27,   1915. 

2.  Letter,    March    12,    1915. 

3.  Letter,  April  20,  1915. 

4.  Letter,   February   27,   1915. 

5.  Letter,  February  26,  1915. 

6.  Letter,  March  16,  1915. 

7.  The  experience  of  the  Cook  County  Agent  coincides  with  that  of  Mr.  Reed. 
During    1915    his   office   extended   aid    to    1,592    deserted   families   for   a   total    of    7  351 
months,  or  an  average  of  four  months  and  eighteen  days  per  family.     Excluding  deser- 
tion cases,   15,661  other  cases  were  aided  for  a  total  of  51,503  months,  or  an  average 
of   three  months  and  eight  days  per  family.     In   other  words,   deserted  families  were 

aided  an  average  of  one  month  and  ten  days  longer  than  the  average  of  other  cases. 

Compiled  from  records  contained  in  the  Annual  Report,  1915. 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE.  33 

$15,829,  for  desertion  relief;  and  $17,637,  or  8.97  per  cent  in  1913.1  The 
United  Hebrew  Charities  of  Philadelphia  in  1914  expended  $4,315,  or  11.5  per 
cent  of  their  budget."  The  Hebrew  Relief  Association  of  the  Cleveland  Federation 
of  Jewish  Charities  in  1913  expended  $2,015,  and  in  1914,  $2,814  for  relief  of 
cases  due  to  desertion.3  In  each  case  this  was  8  per  cent  of  the  total  expenditure 
for  the  year.  The  Jewish  Aid  Society  of  the  Chicago  Associated  »  Jewish 
Charities  in  1915  gave  $28,810,  twenty  per  cent  of  its  total  expenditures  for 
the  year,  for  desertion,  and  $25,645,  or  22.98  per  cent  in  1914.4 

The  last  named  society  through  1913  maintained  61  desertion  cases  on 
its  pension  list  at  an  average  cost  of  $19.06  per  month;  in  1914,  87  deserted 
families  were  kept  at  an  average  expense  of  $14.02  per  month;  in  1915,  70 
desertion  cases  were  kept  on  the  pension  list  at  an  average  of  $19.02  per 
month.5  When  one  understands  that  three  years  and  six  months  is  the  aver- 
age duration  of  pension  cases  which  this  society  has  on  its  files  at  the  present 
time  one  may  begin  to  appreciate  the  dimensions  which  the  financial  burden 
on  account  of  desertion  assumes  in  the  case  of  this  one  agency.6 

Scattering  as  these  figures  are  they  serve  to  convey  some  idea  of  the  heavy 
price  the  community  pays  for  the  privilege  of  permitting  men  at  will  to  un- 
load the  care  of  undesired  families  upon  its  shoulders.  But  the  tale  is  not 
complete.  We  must  add  to  this  the  expense  incurred  because  of  indoor 
relief. 

(b)     INDOOR  RELIEF: 

In  1913  a  committee  appointed  to  make  a  study  of  family  desertion  in 
New  York  City  found 

"that  fully  20  per  cent  of  the  children  committed  to  orphan  asylums  in 
New  York  City  were  children  of  deserting  fathers,  and  that  the  total 
amount  expended  by  the  municipality  for  their  care  approximated  $700,000 
per  annum.  This  does  not  include  the  money  expended  by  the  private 
orphanages  to  which  commitments  were  made  nor  the  cost  of  adminis- 
tration. Although  no  definite  information  could  be  had  a  conservative 
estimate  of  the  amount  thus  expended  is  about  $300,000,  making  the  total 
cost  to  the  community  for  the  care  of  abandoned  children  about  one  million 
dollars  annually."7 

Mrs.  Louis  C.  Madeira  estimates  that  the  cost  of  caring  for  deserted  chil- 
dren who  are  cared  for  in  Philadelphia  institutions  may  be  placed,  conserva- 
tively, at  $300,000  a  year: 

"We  have  been  able  to  gather  figures  of  institutional  children  to  the 
number  of  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one  (1,891).  Of  these,  five  hundred 
and  twenty-two  (522)  were  desertion  cases.  This  would  mean  twenty-seven 
per  cent  (27%),  but  of  course  if  you  take  all  the  institutions  of  Philadel- 
phia this  would  not  be  a  true  proportion  because  in  the  orphanages  there 
is  a  very  small  percentage  of  desertion  cases.  So  for  the  ten  thousand 
children  in  institutions  in  this  city,  and  there  are  a  few  over  ten  thousand 
(10,000),  I  think  fifteen  per  cent  (15%)  would  be  a  fair  proportion  to  charge 
to  desertion  cases.  If  we  reckon  that  these  children  cost  two  hundred 
dollars  ($200)  per  capita  for  each  year,  which  I  think  is  pretty  conservative, 
it  makes  the  bill  which  the  citizens  of  Philadelphia  are  paying  for  these 
dependent  children,  as  a  result  of  this  one  cause  of  desertion,  amount  to 
three  hundred  thousand  dollars  ($300,000)."  8 

Cook  County,  Ills.,  appropriates  $120  a  year  for  each  dependent  boy  and 


1.  Annual  Reports:  1914,  p.  35;  1913,  p.  38. 

2.  Annual  Reports,  p.  38. 

3.  Annual  Reports:  1914,  p.  109;   1913,  p.  112. 

4.  Annual  Reports:  1915,  p.  48;  1914,  p.  54. 

5.  Ibid.;  also  1913,  p.  46. 

6.  Ibid.,   1915  ;   compiled  from  table  on  page  49. 

7.  Report  of  the  National  Desertion  Bureau,  1912-1915,  p.  3. 

8.  Philadelphia  City  Club  Bulletin,  February  12,  1913,  p.  245. 


34  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

$180  for  each  dependent  girl  committed  to  public  indoor  relief  by  the  Juvenile 
Court.  These  are  cared  for  at  public  expense  in  sixteen  subsidized  institutions.1 

From  1904  to  1914  inclusive  the  Juvenile  Court  committed  7,481  boys  and 
5,338  girls  to  these  institutions,2  for  an  average  period  of  two  to  three  years' 
duration,3  of  whom  18  per  cent4  (997  girls  and  1,346  boys)  were  children  de- 
serted by  their  fathers.  The  budget  for  these  sixteen  institutions  in  1914  was 
$307,558. 10.6  Setting  aside  eighteen  per  cent  of  this  amount  we  find  it  to  be  a 
bill  of  $55,360.45  paid  in  that  year  alone  by  the  taxpayers  of  Cook  County 
for  the  support  of  other  men's  children — children  having  living  fathers  to  whom 
they  are  entitled  to  look  for  support.  We  have  no  records  sufficiently  reliable 
to  quote  of  what  would  be  added  to  this  amount  by  private  institutions  giving 
free  care  to  deserted  women  and  children. 

Evidently  a  community  must  pay  dearly  for  the  luxury  of  desertion. 

The  question  might  naturally  arise  as  to  whether  it  is  fair  to  charge  all 
of  these  large  expenditures  to  desertion.  What  proof  can  be  offered  that  these 
children  would  not  have  been  equally  dependent  had  their  fathers  remained 
at  home?  The  record  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  is  convincing 
upon  this  point: 

"Prior  to  the  organization  of  the  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  there 
was  collected  for  dependent  women  and  children  in  the  city  of  Chicago  an 
average  of  not  to  exceed  $12,000  per  year.  After  its  organization,  when  the 
purposes  of  the  court  became  well  known,  many  who  had  heretofore  suffered 
in  silence  brought  their  cases  to  the  court,  where  they  obtained  relief. 
Their  increases  in  amounts  do  not  mean  that  abandonment  and  dependency 
are  on  the  increase,  but  that  once  an  order  is  entered  for  support  it  is  com- 
plied with  promptly.  Owing  to  the  complete  organization  of  the  court  for 
the  collection  of  the  support  required  the  following  amounts  have  been  col- 
lected and  paid: 

1911— $36,679.00 

1912—  74,904.75 

1913—  96,537.20" 

Of  the  grand  total  of  $208,121.15  collected  for  the  three  years  (to  be 
compared  with  the  maximum  of  $36,000  for  any  previous  three  years), 
$191,515.03  was  for  abandoned  women  and  dependent  children.0 

The  foregoing  is  evidence  of  what  the  deserting  husband  and  father  can 
be  made  to  do  to  relieve  those  dependent  upon  him  when  he  feels  the  hand  of 
the  law.  We  are  justified  in  supposing  that  the  fathers  of  deserted  children 


1.  These  institutions  are  the  following  schools: 

Amanda    Smith    Industrial 

Bohemian  Industrial 

Bohemian  Training 

Catherina  Casper  Industrial 

Chicago  Industrial 

Cook  County  Kinderheim 

Glenwood   Manual 

Illinois    Technical 

Ketteler  Manual 

Lisle   Manual 

Lisle  Industrial 

Louise  Manual 

Park  Ridge 

Polish   Manual 

St.   Hedwig's   Industrial 

St.   Mary's  Training 

2.  Records  of  Cook  County  Juvenile   Court. 

3.  Report  of  the  Bureau  of  Public  Welfare  of  Cook  County,  May  1  to  December  1, 
1914    (unpublished).      The  report  gives   this   as  an   approximation,   based  on   an   inten- 
sive  study   of   320   cases. 

4.  Vide,  percentage  statement,  p.   29. 

5.  Comptroller  of  Cook  County,   Annual  Report,  1914,   p.    158. 

6.  From  a  statement  prepared  by  Mrs.  Gertrude  Howe  Britton,  for  the  voters  of 
Chicago,   September  30,    1914. 


SOCIAL   SIGNIFICANCE.  35 

who  are  being  supported  at  public  expense  in  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Chicago 
and  elsewhere,  could  do  as  well  if  it  were  required  of  them. 

We  are  justified  in  supposing  further,  that  if  this  $191,515.03  had  not  been 
collected  and  paid  to  the  families  that  the  various  charities  of  Chicago  would 
have  been  called  upon  to  undertake  the  care  of  those  who  received  it,  since 
they  would  otherwise  have  been  destitute.  * 

B — Moral    Cost. 

Costly  as  desertion  is  seen  to  be  the  financial  tax  it  lays  is  as  nothing 
compared  with  the  moral  cost,  which  cannot  be  measured  in  financial  terms. 
For  every  unhappy  consequence  of  desertion  which  the  members  of  the  aban- 
doned family  suffer  there  is  a  corresponding  one  for  the  community  as  a  whole, 
and  one  more  far  reaching  in  its  effects. 

"Neglected  children,"  said  Mr.  Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  in  speaking  before  the 
Rhode  Island  Conference  of  Charities  and  Corrections  in  1913,  "often  take 
from  the  community  more  than  would  have  been  required  properly  to  nourish 
them." 

(a)  There  are  persons  who  hold  that  a  mark  of  a  city's  greatness  is  the 
completeness  of  its  provision  for  the  care  of  its  dependents  and  delinquents, 
as  evidenced  in  the  great  benevolent  institutions  and  adequate  reformatories. 
We  ought  rather,  as  Lady  Drummond  of  Montreal  has  pointed  out,  to  regard 
those  as  signs  of  weakness,  because  they  show  that  we  allow  conditions  to 
exist  that  are  not  physically  and  morally  fit.    "The  truest  test  of  a  city's  sense 
of  responsibility  is  its  decreasing  need  for  social  institutions  and  the  facility 
which  it  offers  for  the  making  and  keeping  of  homes."  1     Insofar  as  desertion 
throws  dependents  and  delinquents  upon  the  community  it  increases  the  need 
for  such  institutions  and  detracts  from  the  city's  moral  values. 

(b)  However  unhappy  and  injured  those  children  may  be  whom  desertion 
has   forced    into   the   ranks    of   the   premature   wage-earners,    their   physically 
broken  and  uneducated  childhood  means  a  Depleted  and  incomplete  adulthood 
which  will  react  even  more  injuriously  upoiTsociety  as  a  whole.     NoTf  humani- 
tarianism  solely,  but  a  consciousness  that  the  group  at  large  is  drawing  upon 
its  human  principal  when  it  sacrifices  its  children,  is  responsible  for  the  in- 
creasing demand  for  legislation  which  will  safeguard  the  interests  of  the  child. - 

(c)  Already  we  suffer  as  a  nation  in  consequence  of  the  disrepute  into 
which  certain  ideals  of  family  life  have  fallen.    High  ideals  cannot  be  expected 
to  come  from  homes  which  are  themselves  disrupted.     No  period  of  life  is  so 
impressionable  as  that  of  childhood,  and  we  may  expect  that  the  seeds  sown 
in  the  child's  mind  from  the  degrading  conditions  which  atend  desertion  will 
bear  fruit  and  be  continued  from  generation  to  generation.     Lowered  ideals, 
gained  from  intimate  experience  with  desertion  as  children,  may  mean  casual 
and  misfit  marriages  in  future  with  a  cumulative  toll  to  be  expected  of  di- 
vorce, desertion,  crime  and  unhappiness.     Low  ideals  of  marriage  and  citizen- 
ship lower  the  quality  of  the   citizens  who  hold  them,  and  make  them  less 
valuable  to   society.     Society,   in  turn,   is   weakened  to   the   extent  that   such 
citizens  enter  into  its  structure. 

(d)  Just  as  a  defective  sewer  taints  the  surrounding  atmosphere  will  a 
defective  family  life  taint  the  moral  atmosphere.    Where  desertion  is  prevalent 
there  is  an  attendant  lowering  of  the  moral  tone  of  the  locality,  a  tendency 
toward  a  general  disregard  for  other  social  values,  such  as  mark  any  community 


1.  Proceedings   of   the     Canadian     Conference   of     Charities    and   Correction,    1912, 
p.    79. 

2.  "The  life,  health,  vigor  and  training  of  each  and  every  young  person  is  a  mat- 
ter of  great   importance   to   the   nation.      Child    labor    laws   are    forms    of    social    insur- 
ance.     If  children   are  overworked   and   underfed,   if   they   are   given   inadequate   oppor- 
tunity for  healthful  play  and  enjoyment,  if  children  ^.re  forced  to  become  wage  earners 
in   early  youth,   the   inevitable   fruitage  will   be   stuftted,   inefficient   and   apathetic   men 
and  women.     England  is  today  paying  the  penalt>/for  grinding  out  young  lives  in  her 
mines  and  factories.     The  warriors  who  charged  with  the  Light  Brigade,  or  who  stopped 
the  hosts  of  Napoleon  at  Waterloo,  have  gone,  and  their  places  cannot  be  filled  by  the 
prematurely  aged  toilers  in  shop  and  mine."     F.  T.  Carlton,  op.  cit.,  pp.  400-401. 


36  A  STUDY  OP  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

which  is  in  other  ways  accustomed  to  disregard  principles  of  law  and  order. 
If  a  "satisfactory"  outcome  of  desertion  becomes  common  it  may  prove  con- 
tagious and  tempt  other  men  to  resort  to  it;  it  may  finally  become  endemic. 

(e)  "The  unanchored  husband"  cannot  suffer  personal  demoralization  with- 
out reacting  harmfully  upon  society.  Freedom  from  home  ties  illegally  gained 
finds  him  footloose  to  swell  the  ranks  of  anti-social  men.  The  community 
must  expect  no  more  consideration  at  his  hands  than  his  neglected  family  has 
received.  It  must  be  prepared  to  receive  additional  damages  from  his  law 
disregarding  impulses.1 


1.  Mrs.  A.  W.  Solenberger  in  her  graphic  description,  One  Thousand  Homeless 
Men,  has  made  this  clear.  Of  the  one  thousand  men  whom  she  studied,  258,  more  than 
a  fourth,  were  or  had  been  married  at  the  time  of  her  acquaintance  with  them.  "Some 
wife  deserters  were  among  these,  but  just  how  many  it  would  be  impossible  to  state, 
since  *  *  *  a  number  of  the  men  admitted  they  had  'left'  their  families,  but  very 
few  that  they  had  deserted  them."  P.  228. 

A  part  of  these  drifting  men,  filling  our  large  cities,  especially  in  bad  weather 
and  times  of  unemployment,  are,  as  she  says,  chronic  beggars,  vagrants,  confirmed  wan- 
derers or  tramps,  temporary  or  chronic  dependents,  parasites,  criminals  and  imposters, 
hiding  themselves  among  the  homeless  throngs  and  lodging  houses. 

A  conservative  estimate  places  the  population  of  homeless  men  in  Chicago's  cheap 
lodging-house  districts  at  forty  thousand.  The  Health  Department  of  Chicago  estimated 
the  number  to  be  not  less  than  sixty  thousand  during  the  winter  of  1907-'08.  Ibid,  p.  9. 


CHAPTER  V. 

Desertion  Types. 

1—ANALYSIS    BY   TYPES   AS    A    METHOD    OF   STUDY. 

In  a  previous  chapter  an  attempt  was  made  to  analyze  the  conditions 
giving  rise  to  the  phenomenon  of  desertion.  At  this  point  it  seems  logical 
to  continue  the  analysis  by  an  attempt  to  differentiate  the  types  of  desertion. 
All  are  not  of  one  pattern,  as  one  who  is  brought  repeatedly  into  contact  with 
them  soon  learns.  In  this,  as  in  all  other  lines  of  research,  a  classification  of 
the  facts  discovered  is  required  in  order  that  we  may  study  them  more 
minutely  and  understand  them  better.  At  first  it  may  seem  as  though  every 
desertion  is  in  a  class  by  itself;  but  as  familiarity  grows  one  begins  to  note 
a  recurrence  of  similar  characteristics,  and  at  length  to  find  them  falling  into  * 
definite  groups  which  prove  typical.  This  uniformity  makes  a  classification 
possible.1 

The  following  classification  has  been  attempted  on  a  basis  of  the  nature  of 
the  problems  presented  by  the  different  groups  of  cases  and  the  fundamental 
characteristics  common  to  each  group.  It  has  been  worked  out  from  a  study 
of  more  than  six  hundred  cases  recorded  by  the  Stock  Yards'  District  Office 
of  the  Chicago  United  Charities.  It  is  not  claimed  that  this  classification 
is  in  any  sense  final;  it  would  indeed  be  unfortunate  for  it  to  be  so  regarded. 
Its  purpose  has  been  to  point  out  an  important  method  of  study  of  desertions, 
in  the  sincere  hope  that  other  and  more  proficient  studies  may  follow.  A  final 
settlement  of  this  perplexing  problem  will  not  be  possible  until  there  is  taken 
into  account  the  differences  as  well  as  the  similarities  which  the  phenomena 
present.2 

A — The    Spurious    Deserter. 

The  "faked"  desertion  is  by  no  means  a  stranger  to  charity  workers.  It  is 
not  a  desertion  case  at  all  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word,  for  it  does  not 
grow  out  of  any  real  intention  on  the  part  of  the  man  to  abandon  his  family. 
It  is  noted  here  only  because  its  appearance  sometimes  creates  confusion  in 
court  or  at  relief  headquarters  owing  to  the  difficulty  in  distinguishing  it 
from  cases  which  are  bona  fide.  Sometimes  stress  of  circumstance,  but  more 
frequently  a  desire  to  get  something  for  nothing,  induces  man  and  wife  to  pre- 
tend a  desertion  which  in  fact  does  not  exist.  The  expenses  of  childbirth  are 
sometimes  met  by  some  philanthropic  agency  while  the  father  is  near  by  and 
watchfully  awaiting  developments.  Where  fuel  and  provisions  have  been  pro- 
vided in  time  of  need  instances  are  familiar  of  the  father  and  husband  coming 
in  to  enjoy  them  under  cover  of  night. 

William  Morris  and  family  came  to  the  attention  of  the  society  for  the 
first  time  in  June,  1908.  Although  Morris  was  a  sturdy  and  able  bodied  fellow, 
various  streaks  of  bad  fortune  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  furnish  his  fam- 
ily at  all  times  with  the  necessities  of  life.  For  five  years,  intermittently,  they 
were  fed  and  clothed  by  the  society.  Morris  seemed  to  regard  the  society 
as  equal  to  every  emergency,  and  worthy  of  all  confidence.  His  faith  ex- 
panded as  time  passed.  Attempts  to  care  for  the  family's  needs  himself  seemed 
less  and  less  worth  while.  At  length  further  aid  was  refused  as  the  only 
means  of  placing  the  responsibility  upon  Morris,  where  it  belonged.  Two 
days  after  the  agency's  ultimatum  Mrs.  Morris  came  to  the  relief  office  with 


1.  The  first  classification  of  deserters  published  in  the  United  States  was  that  of 
the   Special   Committee   on   Wife   Desertion,    appointed   by   the    Philadelphia   Society   for 
Organizing    Charity.      In    the    committee's    report    five    types    of    deserters    are    given  : 
Chronic,  Reclaimable,  Spurious,  Half-excusable,  and  Un-get-at-able.      Vide,  Bulletin   of 
the  Philadelphia   Society   for   Organising   Charity,  January,    1903,    pp.    6-14. 

2.  The   illustrative   cases   which    follow   have   been    taken   principally    from    fami- 
lies known  to  the  United  Charities  of  Chicago,  fictitious  names  being  used. 


38  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

an  absolutely  new  tale  of  woe.  Morris,  of  all  men,  had  deserted  and  left 
his  unhappy  family  to  starve!  However,  her  unqualified  refusal  to  co-operate 
in  prosecuting  him  was  in  itself  suspicious.  A  month  later  she  again  refused 
decisively  to  take  action  against  him.  A  visit  made  about  this  time,  in  spite 
of'  the  distressing  picture  conjured  up  by  the  story,  revealed  no  distress 
although  aid  had  been  refused  all  the  while.  An  unexpected  visitor  still  later 
trapped  the  careldss  Morris  within  his  own  house,  and  he  could  do  nothing 
but  acknowledge  the  deception. 

This  type  of  "desertion"  is  one  of  the  most  distinctive  products  of  city 
life.  It  does  not  grow  out  of  conditions  of  domestic  friction  or  unhappy  family 
life.  It  is  a  direct  product  of  improperly  administered  charity,  and  will  dis- 
appear automatically  when  relief  is  organized  and  given  in  such  a  way  as  to 
prevent  abuse. 

Unwise  relief  not  only  encourages  the  family  to  persist  in  this  deceitful 
policy  of  collusion;  it  encourages  others  to  take  it  up,  and  so  augments  the  very 
evil  it  is  seeking  to  relieve.  Miss  Ella  Kahn  of  the  Chicago  Jewish  Aid  So- 
ciety, after  investigation  of  one  hundred  cases  coming  under  the  care  of  the 
organization,  says: 

"Proof  of  collusion  was  found  in  ten  of  the  one  hundred  cases;  evidence 

of  it  in  many  others,  and  it  exists  doubtless  in  many  where  evidence  is 

lacking."  x 

B — The  Gradual   Deserter. 

Desertion  is  by  no  means  always  intentional.  Previous  separations  of  p. 
perfectly  legitimate  character  may  wean  husband  from  wife  and  grow  grad- 
ually— almost  accidentally — into  desertion.  This  form  of  desertion  is  most 
likely  to  appear  when  the  nature  of  a  man's  employment  takes  him  away  from 
home  for  extended  periods.  Accordingly  we  find  it  most  commonly  among 
two  groups:  the  casual  laborer,  who  is  driven  from  place  to  place  in  search 
of  work;  and  the  immigrant  who  seeks  to  better  his  fortunes  in  another 
country. 

The  casual  laborer.  The  modern  industrial  system,  with  its  increasing 
efficiency  of  production,  is  at  the  same  time  a  cause  of  increase  in  casual 
employment,  growing  out  of  "industrial  maladjustments  which  arbitrarily  throw 
out  of  work  the  deserving  and  undeserving,  the  efficient  and  inefficient,  the 
skilled  and  unskilled." 2 

The  result  of  casual  employment  is  the  necessity,  more  and  more  apparent, 
for  men  to  search  for  work  in  different  parts  of  the  country.  Being  obliged 
to  travel  extensively  in  order  to  find  it,  families  must  be  left  behind  and  long 
separations  must  be  incurred.  Unemployment  may  lead  the  bread-winner  into 
distant  towns  or  states  in  search  of  occupation.  Failure  to  find  it  may  keep 
him  going  further  afield.  A  sense  of  shame  possibly,  will  restrain  him  from 
returning  home  with  empty  pockets;  or  possibly  he  cannot  raise  funds  to  cover 
the  expense  of  going  back.  Weeks  of  separation  grow  into  months;  at 
length  he  becomes  accustomed  to  being  away  from  his  family  and  finds  it 
no  hardship.  He  is  free  from  responsibility  for  them  at  such  a  distance  and 
they  seem  less  and  less  necessary  to  his  well-being  as  time  goes  on.  Probably 
the  absentee  has  kept  only  slightly  in  touch  with  his  family,  if  at  all,  by 
correspondence,  for  letter  writing  at  best  is  a  task  for  him,  .and  there 
is  really  nothing  much  to  write  except  of  hard  times  and  of  difficulty  in 
getting  work.  At  length  trace  of  him  is  lost  altogether  and  he  may  never 
return  at  all.  Starting  out  with  the  best  intentions  in  the  world  and  with 
the  real  interest  of  his  family  at  heart  he  has  gradually  come  to  regard  his 
home  as  an  unimportant  detail  of  his  life.  Or  if  he  does  not  actually  desert 


1.  Paper    (unpublished)     read     before     a     conference    of    Chicago    Jewish    charity 
tvorkers,  February  23,   1914. 

2.  Adams    and    Sumner,    Labor   Problems,   p.    169. 


DESERTION  TYPES.  39 

on  the  occasion  of  his  first  absence  or  so,  a  mental  preparation  for  a  sub- 
sequent desertion  is  afforded  by  the  periods  of  separation.1 

Mrs.  Kittell  ascribes  John's  desertion  very  largely  to  this.  Two  years  ago 
he  went  to  Colorado  and  obtained  work  in  a  coal  mine.  She  heard  from  him 
occasionally.  He  even  sent  a  little  money  now  and  then;  not  enough  to 
live  on  by  any  means,  but  enough  to  indicate  that  he  remembered  he  had  a 
family.  During  eight  months  of  absence  apparently  he  did  not  feel  any  essen- 
tial lack  in  his  life  because  of  being  away  from  his  wife  and  eight  children. 
But  at  last  he  fell  sick,  and  in  the  rough  mining  camp  where  there  was  no 
one  particularly  interested  in  giving  him  the  attention  he  needed  he  began  to 
feel  that  home  had  its  advantages  after  all.  His  own  selfish  necessity  brought 
him  back.  In  three  months  he  was  fully  restored  and  ready  for  the  road 
again.  His  family,  an  asset  in  the  time  of  his  extremity,  was  a  liability 
now  that  he  was  "expected  to  assist  in  its  support.  His  prior  absence  had 
served  to  give  him  a  feeling  of  indifference  to  famil}1  cares,  and  made  him 
more  ready  to  shed  responsibility  a  second  time.  No  economic  necessity, 
such  as  had  taken  him  to  Colorado  originally,  was  the  excuse  this  time,  for 
work  was  available  in  Chicago.  "He  just  got  drunk  and  left,"  said  Mrs.  Kittell. 
An  unkind  letter  came  from  him  a  few  days  after  his  departure;  a  month 
later  he  wrote  briefly  from  Birmingham,  Alabama.  Since  then  more  than  a 
year  and  a  half  have  passed  and  the  silence  is  unbroken. 

Desertions  growing  thus  gradually  out  of  the  exigencies  of  casual  labor  are 
numerous.  They  may  be  said  to  be  a  direct  result  of  conditions  of  irregular 
employment  characteristic  of  our  large  cities,  necessitated  by  the  present  in- 
dustrial system.  A  large  part  of  it  will  disappear  when  industrial  conditions 
cease  to  compel  long  continued  separations  between  the  casual  laborer  and 
his  family.  Society  must  share  with  the  husband  the  guilt  of  a  desertion 
which  is  due  to  conditions  socially  conditioned  and  not  wholly  within  the  con- 
trol of  the  family. 

Tlie  immigrant.  Difficult  as  it  is  to  deal  with  the  gradual  deserter  who 
has  gone  to  another  part  of  the  country  this  particular  type  presents  a 
still  more  perplexing  problem  when  he  has  come  from  a  foreign  land.  Thou- 
sands of  immigrants  of  all  nationalities  come  to  our  shores  every  year.  A  con- 
siderable number  of  them  are  not  able  to  bring  their  families  although  coming 
with  honorable  intentions  of  sending  for  them  at  the  first  opportunity.  Many 
of  them  do  so;  but  many  others  become  estranged  from  the  old  life  and  home 
by  the  novelty  and  glitter  of  the  new,  and  gradually  cease  to  care  for  their 
families  left  behind.  "Americanization,"  in  their  cases  meaning  a  taste  for 
brighter  lights,  fancier  clothing,  more  stirring  amusements  and  less  confined 
life,  is  not  long  in  being  acquired.  The  simple  life  at  home  comes  to  seem 
slow  and  dull.  Plain,  hard-working  Francisca  or  Gretchen  in  the  Old  Country 
cannot  compare  in  style  with  their  modernized  counterparts  in  the  cities  of 
America.  So  the  new  crowds  out  the  old. 

Michael  Peppo  was  born  and  reared  in  a  quiet,  village  community  of  Italy. 
He  came  from  a  good  family,  sober,  of  industrious  habits.  His  uneventful  life 
followed  an  even  tenor  and  nothing  intervened  to  break  into  it  until  his  mar- 
riage to  Rafaella.  She  was  very  young,  only  fourteen,  whereas  he  was  twenty- 
four;  but  in  addition  to  her  natural  charm  for  him  the  fact  that  she  was  in 
trouble  appealed  to  his  sympathy.  Her  father  had  just  been  sentenced  to 
twenty-five  years  in  prison  for  an  accidental  homicide,  and  possibly  Peppo 


"While  certain  men  [of  those  who  came  to  the  office  for  aid]  admitted  having 
their  families,  very  few  would  own  to  having  deserted  them.  They  claimed  that 
they  had  left  in  order  to  find  work  and  professed  an  intention  of  returning  soon.  This 
claim  was  made  even  in  instances  by  men  who  admitted  that  they  had  not  written  to 
their  homes  nor  heard  from  them  in  five  years  or  more,  and  acknowledged  that  their 
wives  knew  nothing  of  their  whereabouts.  Unquestionably  a  number  of  these  men 
had,  in  fact,  left  their  homes  with  the  sole  intention  of  seek'ng  work,  but  having 
failed  to  find  it,  and  having  in  time  become  tramps  and  vagrants  had  felt  ashamed 
to  return  in  their  penniless  and  degraded  condition.  They  continued  to  wander  until 
^ven  vague  intentions  of  going  back  'some  day'  had  left  their  minds  and  all  responsi- 
bility for  the  support  of  their  families  had  been  abandoned.  Effort  was  often  made 
to  persuade  men  of  this  class  to  return  to  their  families,  but  I  do  not  recall  an  instance 
in  which  it  was  successful."  Mrs.  Solenberger,  One  Thousand  Homeless  Men,  p.  23. 


40  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

was  stirred  by  a  feeling  of  chivalry  at  the  thought  of  giving  her  the  pro- 
tection which  her  father  could  no  longer  afford.  When  they  had  been  married 
but  a  little  while  the  desire  seized  him  to  go  to  America  as  so  many  of  his 
fellow-countrymen  were  doing,  and  make  a  real  home  for  himself  and  his  girl 
bride.  That  was  in  1898.  He  stayed  five  years  without  sending  for  Rafaella, 
and  without  sending  a  single  soldo  for  her  support.  But  he  had  not  forgotten 
her  entirely,  for  in  1903  he  returned  to  Italy  on  a  visit.  He  promised  on  his 
departure,  less  than  a  year  later,  that  he  would  send  for  her  soon.  Ten  years 
passed  this  time,  with  neither  passage  money  nor  support  forthcoming.  All 
the  while  the  older  brothers  of  Rafaella  had  kept  her  from  starvation,  one  of 
whom  had  also  come  to  the  United  States  in  the  meantime.  It  was  a  relief 
all  around  when,  at  the  end  of  this  decade  of  waiting  Peppo  sent  word  for  her 
to  join  him  in  America.  However,  he  thoughtlessly  failed  to  send  money 
on  which  to  come,  and  it  was  by  hard  scraping  that  Rafaella  was  able  to  get 
enough  personal  effects  together  to  sell  for  the  price  of  a  steerage  ticket  to 
New  York  and  the  cheapest  available  transportation  to  Pennsylvania,  where 
her  husband  was  at  work.  After  fifteen  years  of  waiting,  and  by  paying  her 
own  way  across,  Rafaella  knew  at  last  what  it  was  to  have  at  hand  a  husband, 
and  a  father  for  her  children.  There  were  two  bambinos  now;  one  had  been 
born  shortly  after  each  of  Peppo's  two  trips  to  America.  But  her  pleasure  in 
having  him  was  not  to  last.  So  many  years  of  freedom  from  domestic  respon- 
sibilities made  family  cares  irksome,  so  Peppo  moved  on  again,  this  time  to 
Chicago,  leaving  a  good  job  to  do  so.  On  money  furnished  by  her  brother 
Rafaella  followed,  but  Peppo  had  news  of  her  coming  before  she  arrived  and 
fled  again,  sending  word  that  he  would  never  again  live  with  her. 

In  the  United  Kingdom  desertion  through  emigration  reached  such  startling 
proportions  that  in  1911  a  resolution  was  adopted  by  the  Imperial  Conference 
expressed  in  the  following  terms: 

"That  in  order  to  secure  justice  and  protection  of  the  wives  and  children 
who  have  been  deserted  by  their  legal  guardians  either  in  the  United 
Kingdom  or  any  of  the  Dominions,  reciprocal  legal  provisions  should  be 
adopted  in  the  constituent  parts  of  the  Empire  in  the  interests  of  such 
destitute  and  deserted  persons." 1 

In  Glasgow  alone,  for  the  year  ending  May  15,  1912,  340  cases  of  "co- 
lonial" desertion  were  recorded,  all  of  which  were  accomplished  as  emigra- 
tions. In  124  of  the  cases  investigation  showed  that  the  wives  had  knowledge 
beforehand  of  the  proposed  emigrations  which  subsequently  became  desertions.2 

Mr.  Hugo  E.  Varga  has  pointed  out  the  three  courses,  one  of  which  the 
immigrant  is  apt  to  adopt  after  absence  from  his  family  has  grown  into  a 
definite  desertion.3 

i.     He   may  live  in  adultery  with  another  woman. 

ii.  He  may  institute  divorce  proceedings  against  the  wife  in  Europe; 
and  owing  to  our  lax  divorce  laws  which  lend  him  aid  he  is  usually 
successful  in  securing  it,  for  at  present  we  have  no  adequate  way  of  guard- 
ing against  injustices  which  may  arise  in  such  case  from  uncontested  suits 
for  divorce.  A  totally  unsuspecting  wife  across  the  sea  waiting  patiently 
and  trustfully  for  summons  to  join  her  husband,  may  easily  be  divorced 
without  her  knowledge. 

iii.  Sometimes  illegal  marriage  is  effected  in  the  United  States  with- 
out going  to  the  trouble  of  getting  a  divorce  from  the  wife  abroad.  In 
addition  to  leaving  a  destitute  family  across  the  ocean  this  act  of  bigamy, 
if  uncovered,  may  result  in  a  great  deal  of  legal  complexity  because  of  the 
two  sets  of  wives  and  children.  When,  as  sometimes  happens,  the  aban- 
doned family  appeals  to  the  American  minister  or  consul  where  they  are,  an 
international  complication  may  arise. 


1.  Quoted   by    Jas.    R.    Motion,    Wife    and    Family    Desertion:      Emigration    as    a 
Contributory  Cause,  p.  .°,. 

2.  Ibid. 

3.  "Desertion   of  Wives   and   Children  by  Emigrants   to   America,"    Proceedings   of 
the  National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction,  1912,  p.  257.  / 


DESERTION  TYPES.  41 

We  in  America  are  guilty  of  contributory  negligence  insofar  as  we  permit 
such  things  as  these  to  take  place  with  impunity.  We  have  ourselves  added 
to  the  burdens  of  a  society  across  the  sea. 

Upon  our  own  society  there  is  a  vicious  moral  effect.  Not  merely  the 
hardship  and  suffering  which  is  brought  in  this  way  to  numbers  of  wives  and 
children  is  a  result;  the  low  standard  of  morals  which  our  indifference  en- 
courages reacts  most  harmfully  upon  our  own  American  communities.  Crime 
of  various  sorts— fraud,  bigamy,  adultery,  perjury — are  fostered;  and  our  neg- 
ligence in  allowing  them  to  be  overlooked  may  engender  a  general  disregard 
for  the  law  among  those  who  profit  by  our  carelessness.  Moreover,  the  country 
is  robbed  of  a  healthy  domestic  life  to  the  extent  which  such  offenses  as 
Mr.  Varga  has  outlined  may  deprive  it  of  the  beneficial  presence  of  families 
belonging  to  immigrants.  Because  of  the  international  phases  of  the  problem 
presented  it  is  difficult  at  present  to  bring  these  offenders  to  justice,  and  legal 
administration  is  burdened  accordingly. 

Here,  again,  in  the  immigrant  and  "colonial"  deserter  we  have  a  condi- 
tion where  family  disintegration  is  directly  traceable  to  industrial  and  social 
conditions  which  are  fostered  by  the  restless  life  of  cities.  If  the  immigrant 
were  to  bring  his  family  with  him,  and  especially  if  he  were  to  settle  outside 
of  cities  where  his  wife  would  be  not  merely  a  comfort  but  an  economic  asset 
as  well,  probably  the  family  relation  would  remain  intact.1 

The  problem  of  the  gradual  deserter,  both  of  the  casual  laborer  and  of  the 
immigrant,  seems  to  be  one  of  keeping  husband  and  family  together.  Dissat- 
isfaction with  each  other  is  not  the  original  cause;  the  factors  responsible  at 
first  are  the  objective  circumstances  which  compel  them  to  live  apart,  and  so 
afford  an  opportunity  for  indifference  and  unpremeditated  neglect  to  widen 
the  chasm  into  complete  separation  of  life.  The  underlying  remedy  for  this 
type  of  desertion  is  a  change  of  conditions  so  that  they  may  keep  together. 

C— The  "Intermittent  Husband." 

The   descriptive    expression,    "intermittent   husband,"   has   been   employed 
by  charity  workers  to  characterize  a  type  of  deserter  who,  of  all  others,  is 
most  trying  to  the  soul.     By  no  means  all  men  who  deliberately  abandon  fam- 
ilies plan  to  make  the  separation  permanent.     A  lasting-  separation  from  the 
family  is  as  undesirable  to  them  in  many  cases  as  a  permanent  residence  with 
the  family  would  be.    The  home  is  the  port  from  which  the  ship  may  sally  forth  \ 
when  affairs  are  dull  or  unpleasant  on  shore;  it  is  a  haven  to  which  the  vessel/ 
may  return  when  weary  of  buffetings  at  sea.     They  may  slip  their  moorings] 
in  the  stress  of  anger  with  the  express  intention  of  never  coming  back,  but  as/ 
anger  lessens  and  absence  palls  the  intention  fades. 

(a)     THE  PERIODIC  DESERTER. 

Not  quite  with  the  degree  of  predictability  characterizing  the  solstices 
and  equinoxes,  but  with  something  approaching  it,  is  the  periodic  deserter 
who  may  be  counted  on  to  depart  at  stated  intervals  or  upon  certain  occasions. 

Certain  seasons  of  the  year,  according  to  reports  from  the  relief  offices, 
seem  more  likely  to  produce  desertion  than  others.  The  first  chill  of  winter 
is  the  signal  for  many  desertions  each  year.  Husbands  leave  for  a  more 
favorable  climate  and  to  avoid  the  additional  economic  strain  which  cold 
weather  brings.  With  others  the  effect  is  just  the  reverse;  cold  weather  drives 
them  into  the  shelter  of  the  home  which  was  neglected  when  weather  was  fine. 
Consequently  the  opening  up  of  early  summer  will  recall  some  deserters  to  as- 
sume the  family  relationship,  because  the  season  makes  the  obligation  less 
arduous;  others,  arousing  from  their  hibernation  in  the  sheltered  domestic  fold, 
fare  forth  again  in  pleasant  weather. 

Mrs.  Stanley  reports  that  for  the  past  four  years  Stanley  has  abandoned 


1.      "Personally,    as   a   preventive   measure,    I   am   of   the   opinion   that   the   emigra- 
tion of-  married  men  without  their  wives  should  be  discouraged  as  much  as  possible, 
have  seen  how,  when  once  they  get  abroad,  so  many  of  them  give  way  to  intem- 
perance and  vicious  excesses  solely  because  they  are  out  of  reach  of  home  and  family 
Influences."     Jas.  R.  Motion,  op.  cit.,  p.  14. 


42  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

her  each  summer,  but  has  not  failed  to  return  with  fall  "to  sit  by  the  fire  all 
winter,"  apparently  under  the  impression  that  if  he  can  manage  to  support 
himself  without  expense  to  her  half  the  year  she  ought  not  complain  about 
providing  for  him  for  the  other  half. 

Inhuman  as  it  is,  many  men  may  confidently  be  relied  upon  to  desert 
on  each  occasion  of  their  wives'  confinement,  unable  or  unwilling  to  face  the 
problem  of  financing  the  additional  expense. 

Mrs.  Carrothers  can  testify  to  the  unhappiness  of  such  a  situation.  Not 
once,  but  three  times,  she  has  experienced  the  unnatural  negligence.  She  is  by 
no  means  an  ideal  housewife,  her  home  is  not  one  which  a  husband  could 
feel  proud  to  exhibit,  and  she  is  herself  a  sloven;  but  these  faults  have  not 
been  the  ones  which  Carrothers  found  intolerable.  In  fact  he  had  never 
known  anything  else  before  he  married  her.  The  back-breaking  straws  have 
been  the  three  occasions,  in  1910,  1912  and  1914,  when  Catherine,  Anna  and 
George  came  into  the  world.  During  his  periods  of  absence  the  grandparents 
of  the  new  arrivals  have  come  to  the  rescue  and  in  a  poor  way  have  helped 
tide  over  till  the  father's  return. 

An  extreme  case  of  this  is  the  one  reported  by  Miss  Zilpha  D.  Smith,1  of 
the  woman  who  bore  nine  children,  of  whom  seven  had  died.  The  husband 
had  deserted  before  the  birth  and  burial  of  each. 

(b)     THE  TEMPERAMENTAL  DESERTER. 

The  temperamental  deserter  is  not  quite  so  regular  in  his  habits  of  de- 
sertion as  is  the  periodic  deserter.  One  may  safely  predict  that  his  unan- 
nounced departure  is  only  a  matter  of  time,  but  of  how  long  a  time  cannot 
be  accurately  foretold.  This  individual  may  be  easily  thrown  out  of  domestic 
gear  by  a  quarrel  or  spree  and  give  vent  to  his  feelings  by  taking  himself 
off.  Or  a  fit  of  wanderlust  or  discouragement  may  give  the  immediate  im- 
pulse for  departure.  Other  men  who  do  not  desert  are,  of  course,  subject  to 
the  same  vicissitudes,  but  some  way  their  reaction  takes  another  shape. 

Ben  Allen  is  one  of  these  impulsive  deserters,  his  artistic  temperament 
taking  the  particular  form  of  expression  of  "beating  up"  his  family.  Four 
times  he  deserted  before  the  present  occasion,  each  time  leaving  physical  marks 
of  his  displeasure  as  a  souvenir  of  his  going  upon  Lottie  and  whichever 
of  his  five  children  happened  to  be  within  range  at  the  time.  Four  times, 
after  intervals  of  several  weeks  each  during  which  his  temper  has  somewhat 
cooled,  he  has  returned. 

Miss  Brandt's  description  of  the  "typical"  deserter  fits  with  especial  apt- 
ness the  temperamental  type: 

"The  typical  deserter  is  not  a  figure  to  excite  admiration,  nor  even 
much  interest.  He  is  young,  able-bodied,  more  or  less  dissipated,  capable 
of  earning  good  wages  but  rarely  in  a  mood  for  making  the  exertion,  and, 
above  all,  he  is  lacking  in  the  quality  which  makes  an  obligation  to  others 
outweigh  considerations  of  personal  comfort  or  preference.  This  combina- 
tion of  characteristics  makes  him  susceptible  to  attractions  of  various 
sorts;  it  incapacitates  him  for  dealing  in  a  philanthropic  spirit  with  the 
elements  of  discord  which  exist  in  every  household;  and  it  prevents  him 
from  resisting  with  even  an  average  will  the  restlessness  that  is  apt  to 
call  everyone  at  times  away  from  the  ordinary  prose  of  life.  He  may  be, 
withal,  though  he  is  not  always,  of  a  personal  attractiveness  'that  makes 
him  a  coveted  comrade  and  gives  him  an  advantage  with  women."2 

Miss  Brandt's  picture  is  a  life  sized  portrait  of  Joe  Fenton.  A  more 
worthless,  irresponsible  scamp  than  he  scarcely  lived.  That  his  marriage  laid 
him  under  obligation  to  look  after  Katie's  needs  apparently  never  dawned 
on  his  consciousness.  He  worked  a  little  now  and  then  when  he  felt  like  it, 
but  in  the  main  the  burden  of  providing  for  the  household  was  left  to  his 


1.  Op.  cit.,  p.   4. 

2.  Op.  cit.,  p.   63. 


DESERTION  TYPES.  43 

more  competent  wife.  Joe's  sole  redeeming  traits  were  his  good  nature  and 
genuine  affection  for  his  family.  These  served  to  keep  peace  in  the  house- 
hold; and  Katie,  for  all  his  faults,  gave  him  a  cordial  welcome  when  he 
was  about  the  house.  Two  or  three  times  after  marriage  he  had  been  seized 
with  a  wanderlust  and  had  gone  off  for  vacations  of  a  week  or  so,  coming 
back  just  when  Katie  thought  he  had  gone  for  good.  More  than  a  year  had 
passed,  however,  since  his  previous  desertion,  and  she  had  begun  to  hope 
that  he  was  cured.  But  it  proved  not  to  be  so.  During  a  more  protracted 
period  of  loafing  than  usual  Joe  got  himself  arrested  in  March  of  1915  and  sent 
to  the  Bridewell  for  ten  days  to  work  out  a  fine  for  disorderly  conduct.  He 
was  released  to  find  his  wife  and  baby  living  on  aid  from  the  United  Charities 
and  the  landlord  threatening  eviction.  At  such  a  discouraged  moment  as  this 
Joe's  dark  inward  reflections  were  illumined  by  a  letter  from  his  happy-go-lucky 
brother : 

Fort  Morgan  Colo  4-18-15 
Dear  Brother  Joe. 

I  have  decided  to  trop  you  a  feiw  lines  and  hope  you  are  well  and 
your  family  also.  I  have  heart  of  your  troubles  but  could  not  helpet.  I 
have  left  Chi.  and  went  tru  Ky.  Ind.  N.  Y.  Pa.  N.  Jerrsey  and  bak.  Mich. 
Ohio.  111.  Wisconsin  Minnesota  Iway  Mo.  Kansas  Nebr  Colo  and  I  have  not 
done  any  work  since  I  left  I  am  hapy  on  the  road  and  it  is  very  fine, 
I  feel  like  I  never  will  work  again  onless  I  have  seen  all  U.  S.  I  am 
on  my  way  to  Californ  but  I  take  my  time.  I  ant  in  horry,  you  have  been 
traveling,  but  you  have  not  seen  anything  yet  and  you  have  no  experience 
about  Ho  Bo  life  a  tall,  gee  it  is  fine  to  be  on  the  Road.  It  is  10  weeks 
since  I  have  no  home  but  a  Box  Car.  If  you  go  on  the  Road  again  look 
for  my  Monogram  in  the  Cars. 

RAILROAD  JACK. 

I  will  not  work  very  much  this  Sumer  only  to  bull  tru  the  Coast. 
It  is  blenty  of  work  around  here,  but  I  dond  feel  like  working  yet.  I 
wisht  you  vas  not  mareyt  and  could  be  with  me.  I  bet  you  would  engoeyet. 
I  hav  enofh  to  eet  and  a  diferent  place  to  sleep  every  night  and  feel  healty. 
Wen  I  stop  in  some  place  a  week  or  two,  I  will  write  you  and  wait  for  a 
answear.  How  is  my  friend  Sipsey?  If  tere  had  been  3700$  insteaet  37$ 
that  did  not  help  me  any.  I  was  broke  the  secont  week.  I  am  going  to 
see  the  exposition  in  California  and  then  I  am  going  North  East  from 
tere.  This  is  Sunday  the  Stores  are  closed  so  I  could  not  buy  writing  paper. 
I  have  seen  all,  the  big  Citiys  in  the  states  I  have  been  in  it.  I  will  be  in 
Denver  tomorrow,  tell  Steve  Wagner  it  was  me  talking  over  the  phone 
wen  you  was  in  Jaill.  I  will  write  you  great  news  the  next  time.  Give 
my  Regwards  to  all  and  be  well.  Your  Brother 

St. 
4-18-145-W  RAILROAD   JACK1 

This  letter,  discovered  by  his  forlorn  wife  a  day  or  so  after  he  had  departed 
for  regions  unknown,  told  the  story.  With  complete  disregard  for  the  unhappi- 
ness  of  his  little  family,  and  thinking  only  of  how  the  times  were  out  of  joint 
with  himself,  he  had  seized  eagerly  at  the  attractive  outing  suggested  by 
"Railroad  Jack"  and  had  gone  his  way.  Whether  he  carried  out  his  brother's 
plan  of  "bulling  tru  the  Coast,"  and  visiting  all  the  "big  Citiys"  en  route,  we 
have  no  means  of  knowing;  his  wife  has  not  heard  from  him  since.2 


1.     Original  letter  on  file  in  the  office  of  the  Stock  Yards  District  of  the  Chicago 
United   Charities. 

"The  periodical  wanderers  *  *  *  when  the  wanderlust  attracts  them  will 
go  on  a  'spree'  of  tramping,  not  dissimilar  in  many  respects  from  those  of  periodic 
drinkers ;  for  while  the  lust  to  wander  is  upon  them,  families  are  neglected,  savings 
are  spent  and  all  responsibility  is  thrown  to  the  winds.  Among  the  families  we  came 
in  touch  with  in  the  district  office  [Central  District,  Chicago  United  Charities]  there 
were  a  number  in  which  the  man  was  a  periodic  deserter,  and  several  of  these  men 
admitted,  when  questioned,  that  they  'took  to  the  road  awhile'  whenever  they  abandoned 
their  families.  One  man,  a  very  fine  worker,  and,  when  at  home,  a  kind  husband  and 
father,  deserted  his  family  at  regular  intervals  just  six  years  apart.  His  wife  was 
forced  to  apply  to  the  Bureau  for  aid  during  his  third  absence  from  home,  because 
continuous  illness  had  exhausted  the  savings  her  husband  had  left  her  which  he  had 
supposed  would  carry  the  family  through  till  his  return.  This  man  came  to  the  office 
later  and  paid  the  money  we  had  advanced  to  his  wife.  He  spoke  shamefacedly  of  his 
wanderings,  but  said  that  when  the  attacks  came  it  was  useless  for  him  to  try  to  fight 
them.  He  simply  'had  to  go.'  "  Mrs.  Solenberger.  op  cit.,  pp.  121-22.  • 


44  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

In  some  cases  the  separation  may  finally  become  permanent  through  tho 
unwillingness  of  the  wife  to  be  reconciled.  On  the  books  of  the  Cook  County 
Agent  is  the  record  of  Mrs.  Haynes.  Ten  times  Haynes  deserted,  leaving  her 
each  time  with  no  recourse  but  charity;  ten  times,  when  the  mood  was  upon 
him,  he  returned  as  if  nothing  had  happened  and  resumed  the  broken  thread 
of  residence  at  home,  and  found  his  wife  receptive.  The  eleventh  time  the 
worm  turned.  Mrs.  Haynes,  her  resolution  fortified  by  the  urgent  advice  of 
those  who  had  helped  her  the  most,  steadily  refuses  to  allow  him  to  return. 

In  the  words  of  the  Philadelphia  Committee  on  Wife  Desertion:  "After 
a  man  has  deserted  once  the  habit  seems  easy  to  form."  Especially  is  thin 
true  where  the  man  returns  to  find  that  his  family  has  been  comfortably 
cared  for  during  his  absence.  Relief  societies  may  well  look  to  it  to  see 
that  unwise  charity  does  not  turn  the  first-time  deserter  into  a  chronic  or 
habitual  deserter.  In  87  per  cent  of  the  cases  studied  by  the  Philadelphia 
committee,  where  information  was  recorded,  the  husband  had  deserted  more 
than  once.1 

Miss  Smith  found  in  her  Boston  investigation  that 

"out  of  187  cases  where  the  number  of  desertions  was  known,  107  had 
deserted  but  once,  34  had  deserted  twice,  nine  had  deserted  three  times, 
21  had  deserted  'several'  times,  nine  had  deserted  'many'  times,  one  had 
deserted  four  times,  three  had  deserted  five  times,  one  had  deserted  six 
times,  two  had  deserted  seven  times."  - 

Miss    Brandt's    investigation    gave    the    following    on    this    point: 

"Eighty-four  of  the  men  were  known  to  have  deserted  once  before  the 
present  occasion;  38,  twice  before;  112,  three  times  or  more,  of  whom  74 
had  left  'many'  times,  or  'repeatedly.'  If  the  122  who  had  deserted  once  or 
twice  before  be  considered  on  the  road  to  the  last  class  it  would  appear 
that  234  altogether,  about  forty  per  cent  of  all,  belong  to  the  class  of 
chronic  deserters."  3 

Of  the  327  cases  taken  from  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations' 
files,  218  had  no  record  on  this  point,  two  were  specifically  recorded  as  having 
had  no  previous  desertion,  and  107  or  33  per  cent,  were  known  to  have  deserted 
at  least  once  before;  how  many  others  may  have  done  so  we  do  not  know. 
The  absence  of  information  concerning  two-thirds  of  the  entire  number  makes 
it  impossible  to  know  what  proportion  of  them  may  be  called  habitual  de- 
serters; but  for  fifty-one  of  them  this  was  at  least  the  third  offense,  in  a  fair 
way  to  be  called  a  habit. 

TABLE  VI. 

PREVIOUS  DESERTIONS. 

No.  of  Men. 

1  previous    desertion    known     56 

2  previous    desertions    known     17 

3  previous    desertions    known     9 

4  previous    desertions    known     5 

5  previous    desertions    known     6 

7  previous    desertions    known     u 

9   previous    desertions    known     2 

"Several"    previous    desertions    known     10 

Total     107 

No   previous   desertion    -. 2 

No     record     218 

Grand    Total     


1.  Bulletin  of     the    Philadelphia    Society   for  Organizing   Charity,  January,    1903, 
p.   6. 

2.  Op.   cit.,  p.   4. 

3.  Op.  cit.,  p.   13 


DESERTION  TYPES.  45 

The  element  common  to  the  type  described  as  the  "intermittent  hus- 
band" is  an  excessive  lack  of  a  sense  of  responsibility.  A  superlative  sel- 
fishness refuses  to  take  the  needs  of  the  wife  and  the  home  into  considera- 
tion when  personal  comfort  or  desire  suggests  departure.  As  we  have  seen, 
this  type  of  deserter  does  not  necessarily  require  that  his  family  shall  have 
offended  him  in  some  way,  to  provide  a  justification  for  his  conduct.  It  is 
enough  that  an  outside  attraction  shall  present  itself.  Furthermore,  he  is  not 
a  man  who  wants  a  divorce  or  legal  separation.  He  wants  to  be  free  to  come 
back  when  it  suits  him,  and  he  would  be  the  last  to  welcome  a  divorce  court 
as  a  solution  of  his  affairs. 

The  specific  problem  presented  by  this  type  is  one  of  'discipline.  The 
husband  must  be  made  to  see  that  a  family  is  something  more  than  a  mere 
convenience,  to  be  cared  for  or  neglected  at  will.  The  full  weight  of  public 
disapproval,  expressed  in  the  law  and  executed  by  the  court,  must  be  thrown 
into  the  balance  against  him  that  he  may  know  his  obligations  and  be  com- 
pelled to  live  up  to  them. 

D — The   Ill-advised   Marriage  Type. 

A  superficial  inquiry  into  the  divorce  courts  of  any  part  of  the  country 
is  enough  to  convince  one  that  there  are  many  thousands  of  marriages  which 
might  better  never  have  been  contracted.  Low  ideals  of  marriage,  lack  of  train- 
ing for  its  responsibilities,  too  brief  acquaintance,  hasty  or  unconsidered  mar- 
riage, diseased  or  unfit  physical  condition:  these  are  some  of  the  things  which 
may  lead  naturally  to  an  early  desire  to  be  freed  from  the  bond.  The  records 
of  hearings  before  divorce  courts  are  sordid  testimony  to  the  lack  of  healthy 
ideals  concerning  marriage  in  multitudes  of  men  and  women  who  have  entered 
into  it. 

The  records  of  the  Federal  Census  Bureau  upon  this  point  are  to  the 
effect  that  practically  one-third  (32.1  per  cent)  of  the  divorces  granted  through- 
out the  country  between  1887  and  1906  were  to  couples  who  had  been  married 
five  years  or  less.  Twelve  and  one-tenth  per  cent  were  to  couples  who  had 
been  married  two  years  or  less.1 

The  point  of  the  foregoing  is  that  marriages  which  are  entered  into  ill- 
advisedly  will  often  manifest  the  fact  in  early  estrangement.  This  is  reflected 
by  the  divorce  statistics. 

In  the  same  way  the  extent  of  ill-advised  marriages  is  reflected  so  far 
as  our  records  go  in  a  high  rate  of  desertions  during  the  early  years  of 
married  life.  Miss  Brandt  found  that  45.97  per  cent  of  her  deserters  have 
been  married  five  years  or  less  at  the  time  of  their  first  desertion;  22.48  per 
cent,  two  years  or  less;  13.42  per  cent  one  year  or  less.2 

That  there  are  many  persons  seeking  a  way  out  of  marriage  so  soon  after 
it  has  taken  place  is  not  surprising  when  one  observes  on  every  hand  the 
deplorable  ease  with  which  marriage  may  be  contracted  in  this  country  between 
irresponsible  persons,  and  the  carelessness  and  thoughtlessness  with  which  the 
union  is  entered  by  those  capable  of  careful  and  intelligent  consideration. 
The  following  news  item,  appearing  in  the  Chicago  American  under  date  of 
August  18,  1915,  is  illustrative  of  the  lightness  with  which  marriage  is  popularly 
regarded: 


1.      O)).   cit.,  I.   36.     The  following  statement   is  made: 

"The  low  number  in  the  first  year  or  two  is  to  be  attributed  in  part  at  least  to  the 
fact  that  the  routine  court  procedure  for  obtaining  a  divorce  requires  some  time,  and 
that  desertion,  the  leading  cause,  must  in  many  jurisdictions  have  been  of  considerable 
duration  before  it  becomes  a  legal  ground."  Ibid,  I,  38. 

Records  compiled  by  Robert  M.  Sweitzer,  Clerk  of  Cook  County,  Illinois,  from 
3,860  divorce  cases  heard  between  January  1  and  July  1,  1914,  show  that  the  largest 
percentage  of  petitions  for  relief  in  any  single  year  of  married  life — 18  per  cent. — 
comes  within  the  first  twelve  months  of  marriage. 

Op.  cit..  p.   2H. 


46  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

JUST  FURNISH  GIRL 
CEREMONY  IS  FREE 

Anybody  want  to  take  a  chance  on  a  free  marriage  ceremony,  free 
license  included?  The  Commercial  Club  of  St.  Charles  offers  to  "supply 
everything." 

There  is  to  be  a  celebration  of  "St.  Charles'  Day"  at  Pottawatomie 
Park  tomorrow  and  the  committee  in  charge  of  the  "country  store"  have 
issued  a  call  for  couples  "to  get  married  right  on  the  grounds." 

"An  inducement  of  sufficient  size  will  be  offered  to  any  couple,"  says 
the  committee. 

The  hasty  marriage.  Mildred  Hunter  was  graduated  from  Clarksville  High 
School  with  high  honors  in  a  class  of  two  score.  She  was  a  belle  in  the  little 
city  of  ten  thousand  where  she  had  lived  all  her  life,  and  no  social  activities 
of  the  place  of  any  importance  were  complete  without  her  participation. 
"Love  at  first  sight"  was  the  diagnosis  when  she  encountered  Johnston  Free- 
man, a  fascinating-  transient  from  St.  Louis,  on  a  moonlight  hayride  the  summer 
following  her  graduation.  Their  engagement  after  the  single  evening's  ac- 
quaintance was  the  result.  An  elopement  and  marriage  the  third  day  there- 
after indicated  the  swift  progress  of  the  romance;  and  the  culmination  as  well, 
for  in  less  than  three  months  Freeman's  desertion  followed,  a  solution  wel- 
comed by  all  concerned. 

The  marriage  of  convenience.  The  desire  to  free  herself  from  the  neces- 
sity of  self-support,  Mrs.  Lamb  frankly  admits,  was  the  reason  of  her  marriage 
to  Lamb.  At  sixteen  years  she  was  compelled  to  leave  the  farm  in  order 
to  earn  her  own  living  by  "working  out."  A  position  was  secured  for  her 
in  a  hotel  in  Hammond,  Indiana.  The  landlady  of  the  hotel  was  responsible 
for  the  match,  arranging  for  her  to  meet  Lamb,  who  was  one  of  the  boarders, 
"because  he  was  a  butcher  getting  four  dollars  a  day."  This  was  the  first 
courtship  the  unsophisticated  country  girl  had  ever  had  and  a  scant  fortnight's 
acquaintance  found  them  man  and  wife.  Today  Lamb  is  living  with  another 
woman.  Mrs.  Lamb  is  supporting  herself  by  taking  in  washing,  which  she 
does  in  her  cramped  quarters  of  two  rooms  off  Halsted  street. 

The  forced  marriage.  Jacob  McDaniel  and  Mary  Murphy  were  reared  in 
the  uninspiring  atmosphere  "back  of  the  Yards,"  and  grew  up  in  a  community 
not  conducive  to  highest  morals.  In  fact,  the  fathers  of  both  were  drinking 
men,  and  Jacob's  father,  especially,  had  the  reputation  of  being  unkind  to  his 
wife.  The  couple  had  been  neighbors  and  school  mates  from  infancy  but 
were  in  no  sense  betrothed  at  the  time  Jacob  became  engaged  to  another  girl 
who  had  moved  into  the  community.  Before  the  day  set  for  their  wedding, 
however,  Mary's  mother  discovered  that  her  daughter  was  pregnant  and  that 
Jacob  was  the  one  responsible  for  her  condition.  Pressure  was  brought  to 
bear,  and  five  days  before  her  baby  was  born  Mary  Murphy  became  Mary 
McDaniel.  Aside  from  the  gloomy  satisfaction  of  giving  the  child  a  name 
the  marriage  was  a  farce,  for  Jacob  never  pretended  to  make  a  home  for  his 
wife  and  baby.  He  continued  his  attentions  to  the  other  girl,  who  was  re- 
ceptive. Eventually  they  eloped,  going  to  a  large  city  of  the  middle  west 
where  they  lived  as  man  and  wife. 

Forced  marriages,  loveless,  and  consummated  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
legitimizing  the  child,  are  almost  foredoomed  to  failure. 

If  man  and  wife  find  themselves  mismated  the  situation  is  rendered  more 
acute  and  the  denouement  more  tragic  when  "another  woman"  enters  the  scene. 
Eighteen  of  Miss  Brandt's  574  deserters  were  reported  to  have  left  home  with 
another  woman.  "There  were  35  other  cases  in  which  another  woman  was 
believed  to  have  been  the  explanation  of  desertion,  though  the  man  was  not 
known  to  have  left  with  her."1  Marriages  thoughtfully  entered  into  and  based 


1.     Op.  cit.,  p.  36. 


DESERTION  TYPES.  47 

upon  genuine  affection,  preparation  for  marriage  and  adaptability  to  each  other, 
could  hardly  have  such  a  termination.1 

Probably  the  largest  number  of  permanent  desertions  are  traceable  to  ill- 
advised  marriages.  The  ease  and  casualness  with  which  marriage  may  be  con- 
tracted in  this  country,  the  lack  of  safeguards  thrown  about  it,  and  the  general 
decline  of  respect  for  it  as  an  institution  make  this  a  typical  American  deser- 
tion. It  is  not  due  primarily  to  city  conditions,  although  they  effect  it,  but 
to  the  laxity  of  ideals  common  to  our  national  life. 

So  long  as  marriage  is  made  a  toy  of  passing  whims,  to  be  taken  up  or 
discarded  as  individual  impulse  dictates;  so  long  as  our  laws  allow  it  to 
be  undertaken  without  regard  for  the  responsibilities  which 'attend  it;  so  long 
as  lack  of  preparation,  mental  or  economic,  characterize  those  who  take  it  up: 
just  so  long  will  the  ill-advised  marriage  type  be  outstanding  wherever  deser- 
tion is  a  subject  for  consideration. 

E — The  "Last  Resort"  Type. 

A  portion  of  the  men  who  desert  are  not  without  excuse.  Impulse  is 
not  responsible  for  their  departure;  they  are  not  lacking  in  a  sense  of  familial 
duty;  they  are  not  necessarily  persons  who  have  contracted  thoughtless  or 
ill-advised  marriages;  they  are  not  of  that  group  who  become  deserters  as  it 
were  by  accident,  without  premeditated  intent  to  become  so.  They  are  men 
who  have  really  tried  in  many  ways  to  adjust  themselves  to  a  difficult  family 
situation  and  have  failed.  They  have  finally  decided  upon  desertion  because 
U  seemed  the  only  door  open.  They  have  weighed  the  consequences  fully  and 
have  adopted  the  expedient  as  a  last  resort. 

A  somewhat  extreme  instance  will  illustrate: 

The  domestic  situation  in  Henry  Slokowski's  home  might  well  have  tried 
the  patience  of  any  man.  When  he  married  Anna  she  was  a  rather  attractive 
girl,  pretty  in  a  cheap  way,  and  apparently  as  well  endowed  for  the  duties  of 
married  life  as  any  of  the  other  girls  in  the  Polish  community  where  they  lived. 
It  did  not  take  many  days  of  wedlock,  however,  to  reveal  that  a  ready  wit 
which  had  been  one  of  her  charms  in  her  lover's  eyes,  might,  under  certain 
circumstances,  add  venom  to  a  shrewish  tongue.  Her  easy  flow  of  conversa- 
tion when  it  found  expression  in  a  deluge  of  scoldings  and  abuse  was  often 
hard  to  bear.  Henry  was  a  good  worker  and  found  no  difficulty  in  keeping  em- 
ployed at  wages  ranging  from  sixteen  to  thirty-two  dollars  per  week;  but  Anna 
was  unthrifty  and  the  contents  of  the  pay  envelope,  which  he  faithfully  turned 
over  to  her  every  Saturday  night,  ran  through  her  fingers  with  little  to  show 
for  it.  A  slovenly,  ill-kept  house  made  a  proper  frame  for  a  slatternly  wife. 
When  the  children  began  to  come  they  fitted  into  the  picture,  their  unwashed 
little  bodies  and  dirty  clothing  matching  hers.  Every  night,  coming  home  from 
work  to  a  half-prepared  meal  and  a  disorderly  household,  Henry  faced  a  volley 
of  abuse  because  he  did  not  earn  more  than  he  did. 

Henry  patiently  endured  all  this  for  ten  long  years.  He  drank  a  little 
occasionally,  but  not  to  excess.  The  social  conversation  of  the  Polish  saloon 
where  he  dropped  in  for  a  glass  of  beer  perhaps  twice  a  week,  was  prac- 
tically his  only  recreation  or  diversion.  Even  this  was  made  the  subject  of 
bitter  abuse  by  his  wife.  In  and  out  of  his  hearing  she  did  not  fail  to  inform 
those  who  would  listen  of  how  lazy  he  was  that  he  did  not  earn  more,  and 
of  how  he  wasted  that  little  in  saloons  and  beer  halls  while  his  neglected 
family  bore  the  penalty. 

Possibly  Henry  would  have  gone  on  to  the  end  in  this  humble,  hen-pecked 
existence  had  not  Martin  Pribiloff  appeared  on  the  scene.  He  had  come  into 
the  home  as  a  boarder;  he  remained  as  Anna's  lover.  Obviously  Henry  was  in 
the  way;  so,  as  meekly  as  he  had  been  a  husband,  he  became  a  deserter.  The 
charities  know  where  he  is  and  know  that  he  would  go  back  today  willingly 


1.  Dr.  Devme  expresses  the  conviction  that  another  woman  is  not  the  immediate 
cause  or  desertion  so  frequently  as  has  been  supposed ;  that  acquaintance  with  her  is 
more  commonly  formed  after  the  desertion  has  taken  place  and  the  home  ties  are 
broken.  She  may  be  a  cause  of  failure  to  return  home.  Principles  of  Relief,  p.  137. 


48  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

if  Anna  would  give  up  Pribiloff, — for  he  is  a  man  with  whom  even  such  a  de- 
gree of  forgiveness  is  possible.  As  it  is  he  is  a  deserter,  a  man  who  became 
so  only  as  a  last  resort,  not  knowing  what  else  to  do. 

Among  the  poor  as  among  the  rich  there  are  scolding  and  shrewish  wives, 
and  extravagant  and  wasteful  wives.  In  the  case  of  the  poor  this  often  means 
disorderly  households  bearing  no  semblance  to  homes,  added  to  the  rest,  which 
eventually  leads  to  desertion  where  it  would  lead  to  divorce  among  the  well- 
to-do.  The  "last  straw,"  the  immediate  occasion  of  desertion,  may  be  no  worse 
than  many  incidents  which  have  preceded  it.  The  discomforts  of  maladjust- 
ment in  the  family  may  be  rather  unimportant  individually,  but  at  last,  some- 
times after  years,  become  unendurable.  Some  deserters  of  this  type,  like  Henry 
Slokowski,  may  be  willing  to  return  after  a  time  to  try  it  again,  and  in  some 
instances  their  wives  may  be  chastened  and  improved  by  the  experience.  It  is 
more  probable,  however,  that  with  such  men  desertion  is  veritably  a  "poor 
man's  divorce,"  having  all  the  elements  of  finality  and  complete  termination 
of  the  union.  The  marital  experience — some  unforgiveable  circumstance,  a 
man  in  the  case,  or  home  life  rendered  a  torment  because  of  the  unendurable 
characteristics  of  the  other — has  so  embittered  them  that  reconciliation  is  not 
possible. 

Such  a  background  of  experience  evidently  belonged  to  one  man  to 
whom  Judge  Uhlir,  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations,  gave  the  choice 
of  going  to  the  Bridewell  or  returning  to  his  wife.  His  answer  bespoke  vivid 
impressions  of  past  domestic  relations:  "Well,  Judge,  the  Bridewell  is  not 
so  bad!" 

Such  was  the  state  of  mind,  apparently,  that  prompted  Antonio  Salvatore, 
a  Sicilian  immigrant,  to  the  following  letter.  It  was  written  from  an  eastern 
city  in  response  to  urgings  from  the  Chicago  United  Charities  that  he  return 
and  rejoin  his  abandoned  wife  and  babies: 

"I  am  asking  her  [his  wife]  if  she  remembers  what  she  has  done  to 
me.  *  *  *  She  wanted  to  do  whatever  came  into  her  mind.  I  do  not 
want  her  any  more.  I  would  rather  like  to  die.  She  is  free  now;  she 
may  take  any  young  man  she  likes.  If  you  knew  what  she  has  done  to  me 
you  would  think  her  deserving  to  be  burned  alive.  My  first  thought  has 
been  that  to  kill  her,  but  thinking  of  my  children  kept  me  from  doing  it. 
I  used  to  carry  my  revolver  whenever  I  went  out  with  her.  Finally  I 
decided  to  abandon  her.  She  is  apt  to  make  you  believe  that  the  moon 
starts  from  the  sea.  Nobody  abandons  his  family  without  a  reason.  So 
long  as  only  interests  are  concerned  it  does  not  matter  much,  but  when 
honor  is  at  play  one  cannot  be  indifferent.  If  your  wife  had  done  all  this 
.  would  you  live  with  her?  You  would  either  have  killed  or  deserted  her 
also.  Ask  her  if  she  wants  a  divorce.  In  this  case  I  will  come  and 
get  my  children. 

"I  await  a  good  answer.     Greeting  you  I  am" 

ANTONIO   SALVATORE.1 

When  careful  investigation  proves  that  the  deserter  has  been  justified  in 
refusing  to  remain  with  his  wife  the  matter  is  one  fully  warranting  a  divorce  or 
legal  separation,  and  simple  justice  to  the  deserter  demands  that  it  shall  be 
granted.  The  desertion  laws  of  several  states  specifically  state  that  the  penalty 
provided  shall  be  inflicted  only  in  case  the  man  shall  be  found  "without  lawful 
excuse,"  -  and  this  is  implicit  in  all  of  them.  Yet  at  the  present  time  a  man 
may  be  discharged  by  the  courts  as  not  guilty  of  "wilful"  desertion,  and  yet 
remain  legally  bound  to  his  wife — a  legally  sanctioned  deserter,  so  to  speak. 

Generally,  although  not  invariably,  the  "last  resort"  desertion  is  one  that 
occurs  after  several  years  of  married  life,  as  distinguished  from  the  desertion 
soon  after  marriage,  characteristic  of  the  "ill-advised  marriage"  type.  As- 
Miss  Brandt  says,  "it  is  in  the  first  years,  while  the  process  of  adjustment  is 


1.  Original   letter  on  file  in  the  office  of  the   Stock   Yards    District   of   the   Chicago 
United   Charities. 

2.  E.    g.,   Massachusetts ;    Maryland.  , 


DESERTION  TYPES.  49 

going  on  and  the  birth  of  each  child  comes  as  a  distinct  complication  of  the 
economic  problem  of  the  family  that  the  strain  is  greatest."  l  The  fact  that  so 
large  a  percentage  of  those  who  weather  the  strain  of  these  first  years  do 
subsequently  desert  gives  an  added  significance  to  their  action  when  finally 
taken.  Of  the  298  cases  known  to  Miss  Brandt  more  than  one-fourth  had  been 
married  more  than  ten  years  at  the  time  of  their  first  desertion,  and  54.03 
per  cent  had  been  married  six  years  or  more.-  While  it  is  not  correct  to 
assume  that  every  man  who  waits  to  desert  until  he  has  been  married  a  half 
dozen  years  or  more  is  one  of  the  "last  resort"  type,  probably  many  of  them 
are:  men  who  have  been  long-suffering  and  have  forsaken  their  families  only 
when  married  life  became  unendurable.  , 

3— THE    VANISHED    HUSBAND. 

Of  the  211  Philadelphia  deserters  the  whereabouts  of  57  were  recorded  as 
unknown,  and  the  committee  states,  "it  is  safe  to  say  that  to  those  57  could  be 
added  a  large  number  of  the  75  as  to  whose  whereabouts  no  statement  is 
recorded."3  Of  Miss  Brandt's  574  the  locations  of  310,  more  than  half,  were 
unknown.4  Of  the  3,286  cases  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  National  Deser- 
tion Bureau  during  its  first  three  years  881,  or  more  than  a  fourth,  were  not 
found  after  repeated  efforts  by  the  Bureau.5 

As  one  turns  through  the  case  records  of  relief  societies  the  eye  comes 
repeatedly  upon  statements  to  the  effect  that  the  husband  deserted  five,  ten, 
fifteen  years  ago  and  "has  not  been  heard  of  since." 

Needless  to  say,  there  is  no  hope  of  reclaiming  a  deserter  unless  he  can 
first  of  all  be  located.  The  problem  of  "the  vanished  husband"  whom  every 
effort  has  failed  to  reveal  is  so  well  recognized  by  some  of  the  states  that 
they  have  enacted  legislation  permitting  the  wife  to  regard  her  husband  as 
dead  if  no  news  of  him  is  received  for  a  stated  period  of  time.  It  is  true  many 
times  that  lack  of  means  to  prosecute  the  search,  or  indifference  on  the  part 
of  the  family,  results  in  returning  an  answer  to  the  investigator  to  the  effect 
that  the  deserter's  present  location  is  unknown,  when  a  very  slight  effort 
might  disclose  him  near  at  hand.  This  is  made  clear  by  the  work  of  the 
National  Desertion  Bureau.  The  2,405  deserters  which  they  have  succeeded 
in  locating  (73  per  cent  of  all  cases  referred  to  them)  were  "vanished  hus« 
bands"  before  they  were  referred  to  the  Bureau  for  location,  and  but  for 
the  kindly  and  efficient  work  of  the  Bureau  they  would  probably  have  re- 
mained so  until  they  decided  of  their  own  accord  to  reveal  themselves. 

Strictly  speaking  this  is  not  a  separate  type  of  deserter.  The  "vanished 
husband"  is  any  one  of  the  other  types  who  is  lost  to  view. 

4— THE   RECLAIMABLE  vs. 
THE   IRRECLAIMABLE    DESERTER. 

Of  the  2,405  deserters  located  by  the  National  Desertion  Bureau  during 
the  first  three  years  of  its  existence,  reconciliation  was  effected  in  780  cases. 
In  other  words,  nearly  one-third  (32.89  per  cent)  of  those  who  were  found 
were  reclaimed  through  the  services  of  the  Bureau.  In  101  other  cases  recon- 
ciliations were  pending.0  In  the  light  of  experience  we  are  safe  in  saying 
that  many  of  these  would  never  have  rejoined  their  families  of  their  own 
initiative.  The  report  of  the  Bureau  is  a  hopeful  sign.  It  indicates  clearly  that 
desertion  is  not  irremediable,  but  that  where  there  is  the  proper  machinery 


1.  Op.  cit.,  p.   J3. 

Z.  Ibid. 

3.  Op.   cit.,  p.    11. 

4.  Op.  cit.,  p.   59. 

5.  Report  of  the  National  Desertion  Bureau,  1912-1915,   p.   7. 
8.  Report,  1912-1915,  p.   8. 


50  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

for  the  undertaking  a  large  part  of  the  homes  which  desertion  has  disor- 
ganized may  be  rehabilitated,  and  rehabilitated  on  the  basis  of  a  reconciled 
family. 

The  question  of  the  reclamation  of  deserters  is  apart  from  that  of  their 
classification.  Deserters  who  may  be  reclaimed  are  to  be  found  in  every 
class;  deserters  whom  no  efforts  can  succeed  in  restoring  occur  in  each  as 
well. 

Other  things  being  equal,  the  "gradual"  deserter  who  did  not  intend  to 
desert  in  the  first  place,  and  the  "intermittent  husband"  who  is  accustomed 
to  return  at  intervals  anyway,  are  more  likely  to  prove  reclaimable;  the  "ill- 
advised  marriage"  type  and  the  "last  resort"  type,  both  of  which  have  come 
to  regard  marriage  as  a  failure,  are  more  likely  to  prove  irreclaimable.  But 
we  are  justified  in  regarding  deserters  of  whatever  type  as  reclaimable  until 
circumstances  appear  on  investigation  of  the  individual  case  which  make  it  ap- 
pear otherwise. 

One  of  the  primary  objects  of  the  courts  of  domestic  relations  which  have 
been  established  in  New  York,  Chicago,  Brooklyn,  Buffalo,  Boston,  Cincinnati 
and  Philadelphia  is  the  rehabilitation,  as  far  as  may  be,  of  homes  broken  up 
by  desertion.1  This  is  the  raison  d'etre  of  the  National  Desertion  Bureau. 
In  theory,  at  least,  this  is  the  objective  of  every  relief  agency  to  which  de- 
serted women  appeal.  The  highest  end  to  be  sought  is  rehabilitation  on  a  basis 
of  honest  reconciliation  between  husband  and  wife,  where  that  is  possible  and 
desirable. 

Many  times  reconciliation  is  not  possible;  sometimes  it  is  not  desirable. 
This  fact  must  not  be  blinked.  Such  are  the  cases  where  the  deserter  cannot 
be  found  at  all,  or  if  found,  is  in  such  a  condition  as  to  be  unable  to  care  for 
himself,  much  less  a  family;  cases  where  defective  children  would  result  from  a 
reunion;  cases  where  the  vices,  habits  or  idiosyncrasies  of  one  or  both  make 
home  inevitably  a  hell  for  the  other.  Shutting  our  eyes  to  such  conditions 
does  not  eliminate  them.  Reconcilation  at  all  costs  is  a  policy  to  which,  in 
the  interest  of  the  highest  social  welfare,  we  cannot  consistently  commit  our- 
selves. 


1.  Detroit  formerly  had  a  court  of  domestic  relations,  but  it  was  discontinued  be- 
cause found  unconstitutional.  The  Domestic  Relations  Court  was  formerly  a  branch 
of  Division  Two  of  the  Kansas  City,  Missouri,  Municipal  Court,  but  it  no  longer 
exists. 


CHAPTER    VI. 
Treatment  of  Desertion. 

PHASES   OF  TREATMENT. 

In  attempting  to  deal  with  the  individual  case  of  desertion  we  are  con- 
fronted at  the  outset  with  two  distinct  problems.  On  tfee  one  hand  is  the 
deserter  himself;  on  the  other,  the  abandoned  wife  or  family. 

This  natural  line  of  division  suggests  phases  of  treatment  to  correspond: 
that  with  reference  to  the  deserter  has  primarily  to  do  with  locating  him  and 
persuading  him  to  resume  his  domestic  obligations;  that  with  reference  to  the 
deserted  family  must  consider  ways  and  means  of  maintaining  its  members 
until  the  deserter  shall  have  resumed  responsibility  for  them,  or  until  they 
have  become  self-supporting.  Any  plan  of  treatment  which  does  not  consider 
both  is  only  partial  and  does  not  reach  the  real  objective — that  of  re-establish- 
ing normal  familial  relations. 

Neglect  to  take  both  of  these  sides  of  the  situation  into  consideration  has 
led  in  the  past  to  inadequate  policies  of  treatment.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
courts  have  confined  their  activities  largely,  wherever  they  have  acted  at  all, 
to  the  purely  juridical  matters  of  securing  the  punishment  of  the  offending 
husband,  and  have  left  the  family  out  of  consideration.  On  the  other,  the 
charities,  which  have  helped  support  the  dependent  families  have,  partly  of 
necessity,  neglected  the  possibility  of  bringing  the  deserter  to  task. 

A  normal  family  adjustment  can  be  secured  only  when  both  of  these  factors 
are  dealt  with  successfully.  To  this  end  there  must  be  co-operation  of  effort 
between  those  who  have  each  in  charge. 

A— With   Reference  to  the   Deserter. 

Desertion  or  non-support  or  both  are  now  expressly  forbidden  by  law  in 
every  state  of  the  union.  This  prohibition  is  supported  by  a  variety  of  policies 
of  enforcement,  and  a  still  wider  divergence  of  opinion  exists  as  to  the  treat- 
ment which  should  follow  conviction  for  the  offense. 

(a)     WARRANT  FOR  ARREST. 

The  first  step  toward  enforcement  of  the  law  is  to  obtain  a  warrant  for 
the  arrest  of  the  offender.  If  the  wife  or  those  interested  in  her  behalf  can 
persuade  the  deserter  to  return  without  legal  procedure  it  is  preferable.  The 
warrant  should  be  used  only  in  case  persuasion  fails,  in  order  that  he  may  not 
be  needlessly  antagonized. 

There  is  reason  to  suppose  that  a  large  number  of  wilful  deserters  concern- 
ing whose  guilt  there  is  no  shadow  of  a  doubt  escape  prosecution  as  a  result 
of  failure  on  someone's  part  to  put  the  machinery  of  the  law  into  motion 
against  them. 

To  what  extent  is  this  true? 

With  this  question  in  mind  four  hundred  cases  were  taken  at  random 
from  families  known  to  the  Chicago  United  Charities,  and  examination  wan 
made  to  ascertain  how  many  of  them  had  ever  been  taken  into  court.  Forty- 
three  of  these  were  later  discarded  because  information  was  not  available. 
Of  the  remaining  357  inquiry  showed  that  warrants  had  been  issued  in  only 
fifty-four  cases.  That  is,  in  263  or  more  than  73  per  cent  of  the  cases  taken 
without  previous  information  on  the  point,  the  law  had  not  been  called  into 
service  at  all. 


52  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

The  reasons  for  this  failure  were  afterwards  looked  up  in  a  number  of 
cases  and  a  variety  of  explanations  found:1 

aa.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  "refuses  emphatically  to  take 
any  steps  toward  her  husband's  arrest;  thinks  it  a  waste  of  time  as  he  will 
never  keep  up  any  payments  which  the  courts  may  require,  and  if  he  is  im- 
prisoned she  will  gain  nothing.  Wants  the  case  dropped." 

bb.  No  warrant  issued  because  after  consultation  with  the  Legal  Aid 
Society  they  "decided  it  was  not  worth  while,  that  the  wife  was  better  off 
without  him." 

cc.  A  case  similar  to  the  preceding.  Upon  advice  it  was  decided  that 
it  was  better  not  to  bring  the  husband  back  as  he  was  a  drunken  wreck,  in- 
capable of  supporting  himself,  much  less  anyone  else. 

dd.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  desertion  itself  took  place  in  another 
state  and  so  was  not  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Chicago  courts. 

ee.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  did  not  want  to  incur  the  pub- 
licity attending  a  prosecution. 

ff.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  was  unwilling  to  institute  pro- 
ceedings against  her  husband,  being  still  fond  of  him. 

gg.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  considers  herself  fortunate  in 
being  rid  of  a  creature  who  only  lived  at  her  expense  when  at  home.  Should 
he  return  he  would  probably  only  become  a  burden  upon  her  again,  a  thing 
which  she  earnestly  wishes  to  avoid. 

hh.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  was  unable  to  give  the  Court 
of  Domestic  Relations  his  address,  and  they  refused  to  issue  one  without  it. 
The  United  Charities  tried  to  locate  the  man  in  order  to  secure  a  warrant, 
but  failed.  Later  the  Legal  Aid  Society  found  him  in  St.  Louis,  the  expense 
for  his  detection  being  met  from  private  funds.  He  was  found  living  with 
another  wife,  and  when  questioned  repudiated  the  Chicago  marriage.  Was 
not  returned  because  funds  for  his  extradition  were  not  available. 

ii.  No  warrant  issued  because  the  wife  feared  that  her  brutal  husband 
might  take  vengeance  upon  her  in  some  way  should  she  undertake  to  prose- 
cute him. 

A  warrant  for  arrest  can  be  issued  only  upon  complaint  of  someone 
eligible  to  enter  a  charge.  As  to  who  this  should  be  Mr.  Baldwin  speaks  as 
follows : 

"Any  person  may  make  the  complaint  when  an  offense  against  the 
state  has  been  committed.  The  agent  of  any  organization  interested  in 
such  cases  already  has  this  right,  therefore,  and  the  only  question  is  as  to 
how  or  when  it  shall  be  begun  by  someone  other  than  the  wife.  Usually 
she  is  the  proper  one  to  do  this,  but  when  she  is  deterred  by  fear,  or 
there  is  a  probability  that  the  chance  of  reconciliation  will  be  less  if  she 
acts,  some  one  else,  with  a  knowledge  of  the  facts,  some  good  probation 
officer  who  has  been  looking  after  the  children,  some  agent  of  a  Humane 
Society  who  has  discovered  conditions  in  the  family  which  demand  atten- 
tion, may  do  so.  It  is  proper  to  respect  family  relations  when  they  are 
normal,  but  often  they  are  not."2 


1.  As  will  be  clear  from   the  following,   these   failures   to  obtain   court  action   are 
in  no  sense  a  criticism  of  the  United  Charities.  Under  the  present  operation  of  the  law 
it   would   be   futile   to   attempt   court   action    in    many    cases.      In    others    the    family    is 
touched   for   a    brief   time   only,   while   relief   needs   are   acute,    and    soon   passes    out    of 
notice.      Moreover,    the   United   Charities   has   such   a   large   volume   of   emergency   work 
each  year  as  to  be  quite  unable,   except  in  a  limited  number  of  cases,   to   do   even   the 
preliminary   things  necessary   before  a  desertion   case  can   be   taken  up   with   the   court 
officials. 

2.  "The  Present  Status  of  Family  Desertion  and  Non-support  Laws,"  p.   34.     Ab- 
stract appears  in  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction, 
1911,  p.  406. 

NOTE.— The  state  law  of  Minnesota  expressly  provides,   however,   that  no  one   but 
the  wife  can   make  complaint   in  such   cases. 


TREATMENT  OF  DESERTION.  53 

There  is  an  advantage  in  having  the  warrant  signed  by  the  wife,  for  it 
practically  commits  her  to  seeing  the  prosecution  through.  If  a  third  person 
has  obtained  a  warrant  relying  upon  the  wife  as  the  main  prosecuting  witness, 
it  is  within  her  power  to  destroy  the  whole  case  by  refusing  to  testify  at  the 
critical  moment,  her  resolution  to  do  so  being  broken  down  when  she  is  con- 
fronted in  court  by  the  husband  himself.  This  is  very  annoying  to  those  who 
have  carried  the  case  so  far  in  her  behalf,  especially  if  time  and  expense  have 
been  required  to  secure  his  presence  in  court.  If  the  wife  herself  has  secured 
the  warrant  she  is  placed  in  a  position  where  she  cannot  consistently  refuse 
to  carry  the  proceedings  to  a  conclusion. 

A  quite  natural  reluctance  exists  on  the  part  of  some  philanthropic  societies 
to  initiate  legal  proceedings.  They  feel,  and  properly  so,'  that  their  ability  to 
serve  the  needy  may  become  prejudiced  if  they  become  mixed  up  in  the  courts, 
and  that  their  standing  in  the  community  may  be  injured  if  they  gain  a  reputa- 
tion for  doing  so.  This  difficulty  may  be  gotten  around  by  having  the  warrant 
sworn  out  in  the  name  of  one  of  the  agents  of  the  society  as  a  private  indi- 
vidual rather  than  in  the  name  of  the  society  itself. 

No  set  rules  can  be  made,  therefore,  as  to  who  shall  institute  proceedings. 
The  question  must  be  decided  in  the  light  of  the  facts  of  each  case  as  it  arises. 
Assuredly  the  society  should  not  commit  itself  to  the  position  that  it  will 
under  no  circumstances  agree  to  prosecute.  As  it  is  at  present,  with  the  wife 
unwilling  or  afraid  to  take  action,  and  the  societies  themselves  refusing  to  do 
so,  men  may  and  do  escape  through  very  lack  of  someone  to  take  out  warrants 
against  them. 

A  regretable  feature  of  some  of  the  courts,  of  which  the  Chicago  Court 
of  Domestic  Relations  is  one.  is  their  refusal  to  issue  warrants  for  the  arrest 
of  deserters  even  when  earnestly  requested  to  do  so,  unless  a  probable  address 
can  be  given.  Thus  another  loop-hole  of  escape  is  furnished  men  who  are 
sufficiently  careful  to  keep  a  knowledge  of  their  whereabouts  from  their 
families.  By  the  very  nature  of  the  offense  these  families,  the  ones  most 
interested  in  the  deserters'  apprehension,  are  the  ones  least  apt  to  know  where 
the  wanderers  are.  To  require  them  to  locate  the  deserter  before  a  warrant 
is  issued  would  be  ludicrous  if  not  so  serious. 

What  a  farce  our  entire  legal  system  would  be  if  this  policy  were  applied 
to  all  criminals;  if  warrants  for  arrest  were  never  issued  unless  the  address 
of  the  person  wanted  were  definitely  known!  With  a  strange  inconsistency 
our  courts,  which  are  willing  to  undergo  great  trouble  and  expense  to  locate 
a  bank-robber  or  a  house-breaker,  and  which  often  scour  the  continent  in 
search  for  a  suspected  forger,  are  comparatively  indifferent  to  the  crime  of 
desertion.  From  the  standpoint  of  community  self-interest  wilful  desertion  is 
more  to  be  deplored  than  many  other  crimes.  Its  effects  are  far  reaching.  Not 
only  by  its  creation  of  dependents  does  it  throw  a  more  general  burden  upon 
the  community  than  does  the  mere  looting  of  a  till,  but  by  its  injury  to  the 
family  it  strikes  at  the  foundations  of  national  integrity.  The  emphasis  which 
regards  desertion  as  a  trivial  offense  is  indeed  unfortunately  placed. 

By  all  means  the  issuance  of  a  warrant  for  a  deserter  should  be  made  as 
easy  as  for  any  other  criminal.  No  change  in  the  law  is  required  to  bring 
this  about  since  desertion  and  non-support  or  both  are  already  statutory 
offenses.  The  change  required  is  in  the  attitude  of  those  who  are  sworn  to 
uphold  the  law.  The  creation  of  courts  of  domestic  relations  is  a  big  step  in 
the  right  direction,  but  greater  efficiency  in  this  regard  is  possible. 

(b)     LOCATION  AND  APPREHENSION. 

The  attitude  on  the  part  of  the  courts  which  has  been  described  has  led 
in  some  cases  to  a  feeling  of  immunity  on  the  part  of  the  deserter.  So  far 
from  considering  himself  a  fugitive  from  justice — as  one  who  is  guilty  of  a 
criminal  offense  should  be  made  to  regard  himself — the  sole  care  may  be  to 
keep  himself  out  of  the  immediate  reach  of  his  family. 

Mrs.  Selz,  for  example,  has  known  for  two  years  that  Fred  is  "somewhere 
on  the  North  side."  At  rare  intervals,  once  every  six  months  or  so,  he  comes 


54  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

over  to  his  old  neighborhood,  meets  his  two  children  as  they  come  from  school, 
visits  with  them  briefly  on  the  street  corner,  gives  them  candy  and  chewing 
gum,  and  goes  his  way.  Mrs.  Selz  does  not  know  her  husband's  address  and 
her  facilities  for  finding  it  are  limited.  She  is  a  detective  neither  by  instinct 
nor  training;  and  the  big  city,  beyond  the  restricted  limits  of  her  immediate 
neighborhood,  is  a  Cretan  labyrinth.  But  the  police  could  locate  him  on 
twenty-four  hours'  notice  should  they  at  any  time  be  seriously  charged  with 
the  task.  When  the  deserter  has  so  little  fear  of  the  law  that  he  does  not 
consider  it  worth  while  to  leave  the  community  to  make  himself  safe  experi- 
enced officers  would  not  find  his  apprehension  a  difficult  matter. 

In  the  main,  deserters  do  not  take  a  chance  of  remaining  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  court.  They  exercise  care  to  keep  their  location  unknown, 
and  go  to  other  cities  or  states  where  they  cannot  so  easily  be  found.  This 
necessitates  an  especial  machinery  for  finding  them  out  akin  to  that  for 
locating  other  criminals.  Every  means  which  is  employed  by  the  law  in 
locating  criminals  of  other  types  should  be  used  in  locating  the  deserter  who 
has  fled  court  jurisdiction.  This  work  is  essentially  that  of  police  and  detec- 
tive officers.  They  have  the  equipment,  the  experience  and  the  system  for 
undertaking  it. 

If  the  man  is  a  first  offender,  or  if  the  chances  for  reconciliation  are  better 
if  legal  pressure  is  not  resorted  to,  the  charities  may  volunteer  to  locate  him 
on  their  own  initiative,  and  turn  the  case  over  to  the  authorities  only  if  they 
do  not  succeed;  particularly  if  the  man  is  thought  to  be  somewhere  within 
easy  reach.  But  this  is  not  the  major  office  of  charitable  societies;  they  are 
not  equipped  for  the  work,  and  whatever  money  or  energy  they  expend  in  this 
way  is  diverted  from  .important  labors  of  another  character. 

When  the  courts  are  indifferent  or  negligent  about  taking  up  cases  to 
which  their  attention  is  properly  called  the  charities  are  in,  a  difficult  position. 
If  they  make  an  effort  to  locate  deserters  and  to  induce  them  to  rejoin  their 
families,  it  is  at  the  expense  of  other  duties;  and  because  they  are  limited 
as  to  the  legal  pressure  which  they  can  bring  to  bear  the  success  of  their 
efforts  is  by  no  means  assured.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  do  not  make  such 
an  effort,  they  must  inevitably  suffer  from  the  impositions  of  families  with 
questionable  claims  to  assistance. 

This  problem  of  "the  vanished  husband,"  so  perplexing  to  the  average 
charity  society  in  the  absence  of  proper  support  from  the  courts,  has  been 
faced  squarely  by  the  National  Desertion  Bureau.  This  organization  for  dealing 
with  deserters  of  the  Hebrew  race,  has  grown  out  of  the  activities  of  the 
National  Conference  of  Jewish  Charities.  Expressed  in  the  words  of  its  Secre- 
tary and  Counsel,  Mr.  Monroe  M.  Goldstein,  the  Bureau  has 

"formulated  a  method  for  locating  deserters,  established  a  network  of 
committees  and  agencies  throughout  the  country  and  abroad,  marshalled 
such  publicity  forces  as  would  aid  in  locating  deserters,  and  organized  a 
comprehensive  system  not  alone  to  locate  deserters  but  to  enable  it  to  deal 
with  the  individual  cases  until  a  definite  and  constructive  result  has  been 
procured.  Equally  important  was  the  establishment  of  a  system  to  follow 
up  the  results  obtained  in  the  individual  cases;  this  meant  the  investigation 
of  homes,  economic  and  social  conditions,  study  of  the  charity  budgets 
for  deserted  families,  and  included  the  organization  of  a  competent  legal 
staff  to  deal  with  that  part  of  the  work  which  required  the  prosecution 
of  offenders."  * 

Since  its  establishment  in  February  of  1911  the  Bureau  has  instituted  the 
most  comprehensive  and  far  reaching  method  yet  put  into  operation  in  the 
United  States  for  making  desertion  unpopular.  It  has  succeeded  in  creating 
an  atmosphere  of  danger  for  Jewish  deserters.  The  secret  of  its  success  is 
largely  found  in  the  system  of  merciless  publicity  given  this  class  of  delinquents. 
A  "Deserters'  Gallery"  of  photographs  of  men  who  are  wanted  under  this 
charge  is  kept  running  in  the  leading  Jewish  periodicals  of  this  country  and 


1.     Report,  1912-1915,  p.  7. 


TREATMENT  OP  DESERTION.  55 

Canada,  with  as  minute  a  description  of  the  men  as  is  possible  to  secure.  It  is 
difficult  for  concealment  or  an  incognito  to  be  long  continued  with  these  adver- 
tisements going  into  every  Jewish  community  in  the  country.  About  one 
hundred  and  fifty  Hebrew  agencies  in  the  United  States  and  elsewhere  cooperate 
in  this  policy,  reporting  to  each  other  as  information  is  secured.  The  fact 
of  discovering  themselves  to  be  listed  in  the  columns  of  wanted  husbands  is 
enough  to  lead  some  men  to  give  up  the  fight  for  concealment  and  to  return 
home.  If  a  man  upon  discovery  by  the  Bureau  does  not  yield  to  moral 
persuasion  the  Bureau  itself  undertakes  action  against  him  and  compels  by 
means  of  law  what  the  deserter  would  not  do  of  his  own  volition. 

The  success  of  the  Bureau  in  its  work  of  location  and  apprehension  may 
be  read  in  the  reports  of  its  first  three  years  of  work.  From  June  1,  1912  to 
June  1,  1915,  the  Bureau  handled  3,286  cases.  Two  thousand  four  hundred 
and  five  men,  or  73  per  cent.,  were  located,  being  traced  to  239  different  cities 
of  the  United  States,  Canada,  England,  Austria,  Argentine  Republic,  Cuba, 
Barbadoes,  Hungary,  Holland  and  Palestine.1 

These  figures  bear  eloquent  testimony  to  the  possibilities  of  dealing  with 
desertion  when  the  work  is  undertaken  by  serious  and  organized  effort.  This 
sort  of  work  should  be  handled  by  the  legal  agencies  of  the  government  as  a 
part  of  the  system  of  social  protection.  Because  the  law  fails  to  make  provision 
for  the  work  private  gifts  are  making  possible  the  work  of  the  National 
Desertion  Bureau.  In  the  meantime  the  Gentile  population,  inadequately  pro- 
tected by  the  law,  and  not  possessing  a  desertion  bureau  of  its  own,  continues 
to  have  its  cases  handled  ineffectively,  and  consequently  can  report  no  abate- 
ment of  the  evil. 

(c)     RETURX  TO  JURISDICTION. 

The  majority  of  those  who  desert  are  of  the  class  which  Mr.  Goldstein  calls 
"nomad  husbands."  They  do  not  take  up  residence  in  the  same  city,  but  for 
the  sake  of  greater  security  leave  the  community  entirely.  Their  freedom  is 
still  more  secure  if  they  go  to  another  state,  from  which  they  cannot  be  taken 
without  a  process  of  extradition.  Two  features  contribute  to  this  security: 
first,  the  general  unwillingness  of  states  to  extradite  a  man  for  so  "trivial" 
an  offense  as  desertion;  second,  the  lack  of  available  funds  for  returning  the 
deserter  to  the  city  where  his  presence  is  wanted. 

By  a  resolution  adopted  by  the  Conference  of  Governors  on  Inter-state 
Extradition  at  New  York  in  1887,  the  chief  executives  of  the  several  states 
went  on  record  as  to  the  first  of  these: 

"Resolved.  That  it  is  the  sense  of  this  Conference  that  the  governors 
of  the  demanding  states  discourage  proceedings  for  the  extradition  of 
persons  charged  with  petty  offenses;  and  that  except  in  special  cases,  under 
aggravating  circumstances,  no  demand  shall  be  made  in  such  cases."  2 

Because  desertion  is  regarded  as  a  "petty  offense"  there  has  been  a 
tendency  on  the  part  of  the  several  governors — in  whose  hands  rests  the  sole 
power  of  granting  requisitions  for  extraditions — in  accordance  with  the  spirit 
of  the  resolution  of  1887,  to  discourage  the  extradition  of  deserting  husbands. 

But  even  should  permission  for  extradition  of  a  deserter  be  secured,  as  it 
sometimes  is,  a  still  more  effective  obstacle  to  securing  his  return  is  found  in 
the  lack  of  funds  to  cover  the  expense  involved.  Judge  Joseph  Z.  Uhlir 
experienced  this  difficulty  while  on  the  bench  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic 
Relations: 

"In  addition  to  the  changes  in  the  law  there  is  also  needed  an  appro- 
priation from  the  county  funds  for  the  arrest  and  return  of  deserting 
husbands  who  have  fled  to  other  states.  Running  away  is  such  an  easy 
method  of  avoiding  trouble  with  wife  and  the  law  that  cases  of  this  sort 


1.  Report,  1912-1915,  pp.   119,   120  and  121. 

2.  Quoted   by   Wm.    H.    Baldwin,    "The   Present    Status   of   Family   Desertion   and 
Non-support  Laws,"  p.  17.     Abstract  appears  in  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference 
of  Charities  and  Correction,  1911,  p.  406. 


56  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

are  extremely  numerous.  The  deserting  husband  may  of  course  be  brought 
back,  but  it  costs  money,  and  that  is  lacking.  I  took  up  the  matter  *  *  * 
but  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  the  Commissioners  [of  Cook  County,  Ills.]  saw 
fit  to  make  appropriation  of  one  thousand  dollars  only.  Much  has  been 
accomplished  with  the  small  sum  available,  and  if  a  larger  sum  could  be 
obtained,  so  that  the  deserter  might  almost  uniformly  be  brought  back, 
the  number  of  desertions  would  decrease  very  rapidly."  1 

Charity  agencies  which  are  interested  in  giving  material  relief  to  the 
deserted  family  cannot  afford  to  expend  their  funds  for  the  purpose  of  bringing 
back  the  husband.  Rarely  are  friends  and  relatives  found  who  are  able  to 
bear  the  expense.  Least  of  all  is  the  abandoned  wife,  so  frequently  an  object 
of  charity  herself,  able  to  furnish  the  requisite  cash.  For  the  Gentile  popula- 
tion there  is  no  National  Desertion  Bureau  to  provide  the  expenses  of  extradi- 
tion after  requisition  has  been  granted.  Yet  funds  are  available  for  the 
extradition  of  sufficiently  "important"  criminals  of  every  other  shade.  It  is  a 
singularly  shortsighted  policy  not  to  make  ample  provision  from  public  funds 
for  this  purpose.  The  expense  of  supporting  the  family  during  the  husband's 
absence  may  be  in  excess  of  the  cost  of  returning  him  to  jurisdiction.  But 
since  the  latter  would  have  to  come  from  the  public  treasury,  and  the  former 
is  usually  met  by  private  charity,  the  disposition  has  been  to  let  the  private 
agencies  bear  the  burden.  If  some  way  were  devised  for  throwing  the  care 
of  deserted  families  solely  upon  the  public  treasury  it  would  soon  be  forced 
upon  the  consciousness  of  the  officials  that  the  more  economical  way  would  be 
to  get  the  man  at  all  hazards.2 

(d)     POLICY  FOLLOWING  COXVICTIOX. 

Let  us  suppose  that  a  deserter  has  been  clumsy  or  unfortunate  enough 
to  fail  of  the  advantage  of  the  many  loop-holes  for  escape  afforded  by  the  law 
and  our  negligent  administration  of  it.  A  warrant,  grudgingly  though  it  may 
have  been,  has  been  issued  for  his  arrest;  for  once  his  concealment  has  failed 
to  grant  him  immunity;  he  has  been  seized  and  taken  before  the  court,  and 
his  guilt,  without  extenuating  circumstances,  has  been  established.  How  must 
he  be  dealt  with  following  conviction? 

In  the  language  of  Dr.  Robert  H.  Gault,  editor  of  The  Journal  of  Criminal 
Law  and  Criminology: 

"Ordinarily  the  offender  and  the  individual  or  individuals  who  are 
injured,  have  diverse  interests.  The  punishment  of  the  former,  therefore, 
does  not  interfere  with  the  welfare  of  the  latter.  Indeed,  the  injured  may 
experience  a  degree  of  satisfaction  because  of  the  legally  inflicted  dis- 
comfiture of  the  offender."  In  desertion  cases,  however,  "the  plaintiff 
and  defendant  are  representatives  of  a  particular  family — a  particular 
unit  in  our  social  organization.  This  being  the  case  *  *  *  we  ought 
here  to  be  particularly  zealous  lest  in  applying  correctives  we  enhance 
that  suffering  of  wife  or  children  or  both,  on  account  of  which  the  action 
was  brought."  3 

If  imprisonment  is  inflicted  upon  the  deserter  under  the  present  system  in 
Illinois  and  many  other  states  it  means  that  the  family  is  deprived  of  all  hope 
of  support  from  him  during  the  period  of  his  sentence.  Such  a  policy  gives 
rise  to  a  great  economic  waste:  the  man  supported  in  jail  at  the  expense  of  the 
public,  often  in  totally  unproductive  idleness;  and  the  family  Confirmed  in  its 
dependency  since  the  law  has  taken  away  its  main  hope  for  an  independent 
support. 

If  a  fine  is  imposed  it  will  have  to  be  paid  with  money  which  might  far 


1.  Report   on    the    work    of   the    [Chicago']    Court    of   Domestic   Relations,    1913-14, 

2.  "The  money   saver!    to   the   state  by  refusing  to   pay   extradition   costs   must  be 
paid  in  another  form  by  the  public  or  private  charities,  and  usually  with  most  usurious 
interest."     Proceedings  of  the  Seventh  Maryland  Conference  of   Charities  and   Correc- 
tion, 1911,  p.   105. 

3.  Editorial,   November,    1912. 


TREATMENT  OP  DESERTION.  57 

tetter  be  applied  to  the  need  of  the  neglected  family.  In  either  case  the  brunt 
of  the  penalty  will  fall  upon  them.  Moreover,  such  a  penalty  may  very  easily 
cause  the  man's  heart  to  be  hardened  against  his  family;  punishment  may 
only  serve  to  make  the  breach  in  the  family  wider  and  prevent  for  all  time 
the  reconciliation  of  husband  and  wife,  which  is  a  part  of  the  objective  sought. 

A  policy  is  required  which  will  make  restoration  of  normal  domestic  rela- 
tions and  a  prevention  of  future  ruptures,  and  not  punishment,  the  chief  end 
of  treatment.  With  a  purpose  of  working  out  such  a  policy  there  have  been 
established  in  various  cities  of  the  United  States1  courts  of  domestic  relations 
based  on  "a  more  just  and  sympathetic  treatment  of  each  offender,"  "not  less 
just  because  more  intelligent  and  sympathetic."  The  animating  purpose  is 
"not  only  to  secure  support,  but  also  patiently  to  acquire  and  maintain  such  a 
knowledge  of  each  case  as  will  enable  him  [the  judge]  to  remove  the  causes 
of  non-support  and  restore  the  normal  family  relations  by  the  use  of  all  means 
at  his  command."  -  Protection  of  home  ties  rather  than  punishment  of  the 
offender  is  the  aim  of  the  court. 

In  many  cases — such  is  the  testimony  of  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic 
Relations — the  family  is  reunited  not  because  of  any  fear  of  the  law  in  the 
offender's  heart,  but  because  the  court  has  acted  simply  and  naturally  in  the 
capacity  of  friendly  mediator  between  estranged  husband  and  wife.  The 
elements  of  reconciliation  were  already  there,  and  a  go-between  was  all 
required  to  accomplish  it. 

Others  there  are  of  the  "irreconcilable"  type  who  will  under  no  circum- 
stances resume  life  at  home,  or  whose  wives  will  not  consent  to  their  return. 
Persons  are  not  lacking  who  maintain  that  the  law  should  be  brought  to  bear 
to  compel  obstinate  ones  to  live  together  again.  Such  a  policy  does  not  seem 
wise.  Human  nature  being  what  it  is,  happiness  is  not  induced  by  compelling 
incompatibles  to  dwell  together.  Indeed,  it  may  in  certain  cases  be  the  duty 
of  the  domestic  relations  courts  to  make  certain  that  husband  and  wife  shall 
not  live  together  again  by  assisting  to  secure  them  a  legal  separation  or 
absolute  divorce.  Cases  where  reunion  can  only  mean  a  renewed  round  of 
household  abuse  and  harmful  influences  upon  the  children,  or  the  quartering 
upon  the  wife  of  a  worthless  husband  who  must  be  supported;  cases  where  it 
would  mean  the  bringing  of  defective  children  into  the  world.  In  any  event, 
whether  a  reconciliation  is  effected  or  not,  the  deserter  should  be  required  to 
contribute  to  his  family's  support;  voluntarily  if  he  will,  under  compulsion  if 
his  consent  cannot  be  obtained.  The  interest  of  society  is  not  a  sentimental 
one,  for  society  will  have  to  make  a  living  for  the  family  if  he  does  not,  unless 
they  have  other  resources.  Under  the  law  he  assumed  responsibility  for  his 
family  when  he  married  his  wife.  He  is  responsible  for  his  children's  existence 
in  the  world.  The  law  must  see  that  he  does  not  let  them  come  to  want,  even 
though  it  may  not  wisely  compel  him  to  share  their  domicile. 

The  policy  of  the  domestic  relations  courts  is  to  put  the  deserter  under 


1.  Vide,  p.  50. 

2.  Win.    H.    Baldwin,    "The   Court   of   Domestic  Relations   of  Chicago,"   Journal   of 
Criminal    Laic    and    Criminology,    September,    1912. 

:l.  "In  dealing-  with  infractions  of  the  law,  the  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  does 
not  aim  principally  at  punishing-  the  offender,  but  at  working-  out  such  a  solution  of 
the  whole  problem  as  to  prevent  its  recurrence,  if  possible,  or  to  remove  the  causes 
of  it.  What  the  judge  of  this  court  needs,  is  not  so  much  profound  erudition  in  the 
technicalities  of  the  law,  a.s  a  sympathetic  knowledge  of  human  nature  and  an  in- 
stinctive recognition  of  the  right  method  of  handling  the  individual  offender.  As  a 
distinguished  English  visitor  expressed  it.  the  judge  must  be  a  wise  Eastern  kaadi.  A 
plain,  friendly  talk  will  convince  one  man  that  he  has  behaved  badly,  and  he  begs 
forgiveness  of  his  wife  and  promises  the  judge  to  keep  away  from  liquor  or  whatever 
the  cause  of  the  trouble  may  be,  while  another  man  gets  more  stubborn,  if  the  judge 
is  inclined  to  show  him  leniency.  Sometimes  a  mere  taste  of  imprisonment  will  tame 
a  defiant  husband.  He  is  sentenced  to  six  months  in  the  House  of  Correction,  and 
the  bailiff  locks  him  up  temporarily  in  a  back  room.  It  is  wonderful  what  effect  a  few 
hours'  confinement  will  have.  The  man  begins  to  figure  out  how  long  six  months  must 
be  if  two  hours  seems  an  infinity,  and  when  later  in  the  day  he  is  again  brought  before 
the  judge,  he  is  a  broken  man  and  sincerely  anxious  to  deserve  the  clemency  of  the 
court  It  goes  without  saying  that  the  judge  makes  extensive  use  of  the  probation 
act.  Sending  the  man  to  jail  or  workhouse  leaves  the  family  generally  in  destitute 
circumstances.  So  the  sentence  is  suspended,  and  the  offender  placed  on  his  good 
behavior,  under  the  supervision  of  an  adult  probation  officer."  Judge  Joseph  Z.  Uhlir, 
op.  cit.,  p.  2. 


58  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

/ 

order  to  contribute  regularly  to  the  support  of  his  dependents,  and  to  reserve 
punishment  as  a  last  resort,  inflicting  it  only  as  an  alternative  when  the  husband 
proves  unwilling  to  resume  his  obligations,  or  having  agreed  to,  when  he  breaks 
his  promise.1 

For  those  men  who  are  not  amenable  to  anything  less  than  punishment 
special  provision  should  be  made.  It  is  not  enough  that  they  be  locked  up  for 
an  unproductive  period  in  county  jail  or  city  Bridewell  and  the  family  left  to 
fend  for  itself  or  fall  back  upon  charity.  Some  way  should  be  devised  whereby 
the  delinquent  may  be  made  to  contribute  to  his  family's  support  while  under- 
going punishment. 

The  law  in  the  District  of  Columbia  makes  non-support  "a  misdemeanor 
punishable  by  a  fine  of  not  to  exceed  five  hundred  dollars,  or  one  year's 
imprisonment  with  hard  labor."  In  case  of  the  fine  being  assessed,  the  court 
is  permitted  to  turn  it  wholly  or  in  part  to  the  wife.  If  the  man  is  sent  to  the 
workhouse,  fifty  cents  is  paid  each  day  for  the  support  of  his  children.2 

The  Secretary  of  the  California  State  Board  of  Charities  and  Correction 
writes: 

"In  Los  Angeles  County  family  deserters  are  sent  to  a  prison  camp 
where  they  work  on  public  roads.  A  dollar  and  a  half  a  day  is  paid  to  the 
deserted  family  during  the  period  of  the  man's  imprisonment."  3 

One  of  the  difficulties  at  present  encountered  by  the  courts  in  attempting 
to  convict  deserters  has  already  been  touched  upon:  the  unwillingness  of  the 
wife  to  testify  at  the  critical  point.  When  she  is  confronted  by  the  man  her 
righteous  indignation  at  his  neglect  often  melts  away  and  leaves  her  in  a 
forgiving  mood;  or  his  actual  presence  may  intimidate  her.  In  either  case  she 
hesitates  to  testify  to  his  hurt,  and  where  she  is  the  essential  witness  the 
prosecution  may  entirely  break  down.4  The  wife  rarely  derives  personal 
satisfaction  from  her  husband's  punishment,  however  just  the  penalty  may  be; 
and  frequently  after  the  court  has  passed  sentence  upon  the  husband,  she 
becomes  the  most  earnest  pleader  for  its  mitigation.  If,  then,  she  knows  that 


1.  The   Kansas   City  plan   is   to   handle   desertion   as  one   of  the   phases   of  work 
of  its   Board   of   Public  Welfare.      A  man   guilty   of  abandonment   is   passed   upon   by 
the  Board  of  Pardons  and  Paroles  as  is  any  other  offender.     The  paroled  man  is  given 
a  written  statement  of  the  terms  and  conditions  of  his  parole ;   if  he  violates  it  he  is 
sent  to  the  workhouse  when  caught  for  three  times  the  unexpired  term.     He  is  required 
to  make  a  weekly  report  to  the  Board,   stating  place  or  employment,   residence,  wages 
and  detailed  account  of  his  expenses.     Honest  employment  and  respectable  lodging  are 
required.     Mr.  Jacob  Billikof,  of  the  United  Jewish  Charities  of  Kansas   City,   reports 
that  at  least  70   per  cent  have  reported  regularly  and  given   satisfactory  accounts   of 
themselves.     For  a  deserter,   whenever  it  is  desired,    paying  a  certain   amount   of   the 
weekly  wage  for  family  support  may  be  made  a  condition  of  parole.     Proceedings   of 
the  National  Conference  of  Jewish  Charities,  1910,  p.  107. 

2.  Judge  William   DeLacy,    "Operation  of  the   Law   in   Washington,   D.   C.,"   Pro- 
ceedings of  the  Seventh  Maryland  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction,  1911,  p.  99. 

3.  Letter,   June   7,    1915. 

4.  This   is   one   of   the   reasons   advanced   against   the  expense   of   extraditing   de- 
serters.    All  the  time,  trouble  and  expense  may  go  for  nothing  where  the  wife  simply 
by  refusing  to   testify  can  stay  the   proceedings   and  give   the   court   no   choice  but   to 
release  the  offender,  who  may  promptly  abscond  again. 

This  has  led  to  the  suggestion  that  in  cases  of  desertion  and  non-support  the  wife 
be  made  a  compellable  witness.  "If  she  can  refuse  to  testify,  thus  making  herself 
responsible  to  her  husband  for  any  trouble  her  evidence  causes  him,  she  may  be  afraid 
to  give  it,  or  if  she  does  give  it,  may  subject  herself  to  ill  treatment  afterwards  by 
him  on  account  of  it.  If  the  law  compels  her  to  testify  the  husband  has  no  reason 
to  condemn  her  or  to  attempt  to  punish  her  for  doing  so.  This  makes  it  much  easier 
to  bring  out  the  facts  and  secure  conviction  where  it  is  deserved."  Wm.  H.  Baldwin, 
Family  Desertion  and  Non-support  Laws,  p.  29. 

In  seventeen  states  the  wife  is  not  a  competent  witness  in  desertion  and  non- 
support  cases :  Arizona,  Arkansas,  California,  Idaho,  Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Montana, 
Nebraska,  New  Mexico,  North  Carolina,  Oklahoma,  South  Carolina,  South  Dakota,  Utah, 
Washington,  West  Virginia  and  Wyoming.  "She  is  a  competent  but  not  a  compellable 
witness  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  Kansas,  Massachusetts  and  Rhode  Island,  and  it  is 
stated  that  in  Connecticut  her  testimony,  if  offered,  would  not  be  refused.  In  all  the 
other  states,  either  by  general  provision  or  by  the  laws  on  this  subject,  she  is  a  com- 
petent and  compellable  witness."  Ibid. 

(The  Session  Laws  of  Illinois  for  1915,  however,  make  the  wife  a  competent  but  not 
a  compellable  witness.) 


TREATMENT  OF  DESERTION.  59 

his  punishment  will  not  profit  her  in  the  way  of  making  her  support  easier, 
but  may  make  her  lot  harder  by  arousing  his  animosity  against  her,  it  is  not 
strange  that  she  may  consider  the  advantage  arising  from  his  conviction  as 
too  small  to  justify  the  risk  of  appearing  against  him. 

A  treatment  which  will  force  the  husband  to  contribute  to  his  family's 
support  even  when  in  prison  will  make  the  wife  less  reluctant  to  give  evidence 
necessary  to  the  prosecution. 

This  advantage,  however,  is  not  the  one  of  largest  importance.  The  primary 
reason  for  having  such  a  policy  is  the  fact  that  under  any  circumstances 
where  the  husband  is  convicted  of  wilful  desertion  there  is  a  guarantee  that 
he  shall  contribute  to  the  support  of  those  dependent  upcte  him.  If  such  a 
policy  is  in  force  it  will  not  often  happen  that,  given  his  choice,  a  man  will 
prefer  to  support  his  family  as  a  convict  rather  than  as  a  free  man. 

Oregon  in  1907  passed  a  law  providing  that  men  guilty  of  non-support 
might  be  compelled  to  work  on  the  public  roads,  and  that  the  county  court 
might  pay  not  to  exceed  a  dollar  and  a  half  for  each  day's  labor.  The  same 
year  Indiana  and  Maryland  passed  laws  providing  that  "excess  earnings"  of 
non-supporters  confined  in  the  workhouse  might  be  paid  to  the  family;  and 
Colorado  specified  the  same  year  that  county  prisoners  be  required  to  work 
eight  hours  a  day  "when  possible,"  and  that  from  their  earnings  men  in  prison 
for  non-support  should  have  from  fifty  cents  to  one  dollar  a  day  paid  to  their 
families.  Maine  also  made  provision  in  1907  for  paying  fifty  cents  a  day  to 
families  of  such  prisoners,  repealed  the  law  in  1909  and  re-enacted  it  in  1911. 
Under  none  of  these  does  anything  of  consequence  seem  to  have  been  paid. 
Michigan,  Ohio.  Massachusetts,  New  Jersey,  and  Utah  also  have  provisions 
along  this  line.  Michigan  and  the  District  of  Columbia  have  had  a  more 
successful  experience  in  providing  for  families  in  this  way  than  have  any  of 
the  others  cited.1 

A  pertinent  query  in  connection  with  the  treatment  of  deserters  concerns 
the  grade  of  the  offense.  Thirty-four  states,  with  the  District  of  Columbia, 
have  made  desertion  or  non-support  a  misdemeanor;  the  remaining  fifteen  have 
made  it  a  felony.2  The  distinction  is  important,  for  where  the  crime  ranks 
as  a  felony  conviction  leaves  no  choice  as  to  the  penalty:  states  imprisonment 
is  prescribed. 

States  which  have  made  desertion  a  felony  have  been  moved  to  do  so 
chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  securing  extradition,  under  the  impression  that 
extradition  cannot  be  secured  for  an  offense  less  than  a  felony. 

"As  Mr.  Baldwin,  in  his  address  before  the  National  Conference  of 
Charities  and  Corrections  at  Boston,  June  10,  1911,  proves,  it  is  a  mistaken 
impression.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  in  defining  the  extradi- 
table person  (Art.  IV,  Sec.  2)  says:  'A  person  charged  in  any  state  with 
treason,  felony  or  other  crime:  etc.  And  this,  as  Mr.  Baldwin  points  out. 


1.     Wm.    H.    Baldwin,    "Present     Status     of     Family     Desertion     and     Non-support 
pp.  29-31.     Abstract  appears  in  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference  of  Char- 
ities and  Correction.  1911.  p.  4 

Judge  W.  X.  Gemmill  of  the  Chicago  Municipal  Court,  and  others,  have  pointed 
out  a  practical  difficulty  in  carrying  out  a  law  to  remunerate  the  families  of  convicts 
from  the  fruits  of  their  prison  labor? — viz:,  that  in  the  present  stage  of  prison  indus- 
tries often  it  is  true  that  the  prisoner  does  not  produce  enough  to  cover  the  actual 
expense  which  the  state  incurs  in  supporting  him.  and  that  consequently  there  is  no 
surplus  which  could  be  devoted  to  the  support  of  his  family.  Without  pausing  to  com- 
ment upon  the  management  of  a  system  which  has  the  full  use  of  a  man's  time  and  is 
not  able  to  make  him  self-supporting,  able-bodied  as  he  is.  a  question  may  be  asked  • 

Granted  that  the  deserter's  prison  labor  does  not  produce  enough  surplus  to  be  of 
material  assistance  to  his  family,  in  what  respect  is  the  community  better  off  econom- 
ically if  it  must  by  means  of  charity  assume  the  expense  of  the  family's  support? 

-.     Misdemeanor:     Alabama,   Arizona.   Arkansas,  Colorado,   Delaware,   District  of 

Columbia.  Georgia.  Idaho.  Illinois,   Kansas.   Kentucky,   Louisiana.   Maryland.   Massachu- 

Minnesota.    Mississippi.    Montana.    Nevada,    New    Hampshire.    S'ew    Jersey,    New 

Mexico,   North   Carolina.   Oklahoma.   Oregon.    Pennsylvania.   Rhode   Island.    North   Caro- 

rina.    South   Dakota,   Tennessee,   Texas,   Vermont,   Virginia,   West   Virginia,   Wyoming. — 

Felony:  California.  Connecticut,  Florida,  Indiana,  Iowa,  Maine.  Michigan,  Mis- 
souri, Nebraska,  North  Dakota,  New  York,  Ohio,  Utah,  Washington,  Wisconsin. — 15. 


60  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

was  confirmed  fifty  years  ago  by  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  (24  Howard,  U.  S.  66)  with  reference  to  'treason,  felony 
or  other  crime'  in  the  following  language:  'The  word  crime  of  itself 
includes  every  offense  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  in  the  grade  of 
offenses,  and  includes  what  are  called  misdemeanors  as  well  as  treason 
and  felony.' 

"Nothing  more  is  needed  to  prove  the  extraditable  character  of  misde- 
meanor but  there  is  further  proof  of  the  most  cogent  kind:  the  fact  that 
misdemeanants  actually  are,  in  many  cases,  extradited — moved  from  one 
state  to  another  with  facility  and  despatch.1 

"The  strongest  reasons  against  making  the  offense  a  felony  are  in  the 
first  place,  that  the  family  has  already  been  hard  pushed  by  necessity 
occasioned  by  an  indolent  or  reckless  head,  and  to  place  him  in  prison  is 
simply  to  aggravate  the  condition  that  led  to  the  complaint  against  him. 
It  is  like  fining  the  drunkard  who  has  deprived  his  family  of  bread  to 
supply  himself  with  liquor;  secondly,  the  case  is  usually  begun  in  a  lower 
court  which  has  no  power,  and  which  often  releases  the  defendant  on 
mere  promise  of  support,  when  there  is  no  machinery  to  secure  it;  it  is 
much  more  difficult  to  get  a  conviction  in  a  felony  case,  and  the  result  is 
that  many  who  should  fare  otherwise  go  scot  free  of  all  responsibility."  2 

B — With  Reference  to  the  Abandoned  Family. 

The  second  phase  of  treatment  has  to  do  with  the  family  which  has  been 
left  behind.  Since  the  record  is  rarely  made  of  the  desertion  unless  the  family 
comes  to  want  this  is  primarily  a  question  of  maintaining  the  family  until  the 
deserter  can  be  located  and  induced  to  resume  responsibility  for  its  dependent 
members;  or,  in  case  he  cannot  be  produced,  until  the  family  can  be  made 
self-supporting.  This  phase  of  treatment  is  one  which  usually  falls  to  the 
charities. 

If  the  expense  of  caring  for  deserted  families  were  met  from  the  public 
treasury  the  eyes  of  the  law  would  be  more  widely  opened  to  its  evils,  and 
possibly  a  more  serious  attempt  would  be  made  to  deal  with  deserters.  Self- 
interest  would  prompt  the  state  to  such  a  course.  Unfortunately  the  govern- 
ment does  not  assume  this  burden  in  most  communities — at  least  not  in  its 
entirety — and  this  makes  it  obligatory  for  private  philanthropy  to  come  to  the 
rescue  if  aid  is  to  be  extended  to  all  bona  fide  abandoned  families.  Probably 
the  readiness  with  which  private  charity  takes  up  the  obligation  partly  accounts 
for  the  indifference  of  those  in  charge  of  public  relief. 

In  a  number  of  cities^New  York,  Philadelphia,  Brooklyn,  Baltimore  and 
Washington  among  others — public  outdoor  relief  has  been  expressly  done  away 
with  for  dependents  of  all  classes.3  Where  this  is  the  case  a  deserted  family 
that  is  really  dependent  has  only  one  recourse  unless  it  shall  agree  to  be 
broken  up  entirely  and  to  have  its  members  cared  for  in  institutions,  viz.,  to 
apply  to  private  charity.  In  a  number  of  states  a  Mothers'  Pension  Act  sets 
aside  from  public  funds  an  appropriation  for  the  care  of  dependent  mothers; 
but  several  of  these  states  forbid  to  deserted  mothers  participation  in  the 
benefits  of  the  act.4 

The  private  charities  in  many  cities,  therefore,  have  the  responsibility  of 


1.  Mr.    Baldwin's    table    of   statistics    in    connection    with    the    address    mentioned 
shows  that  extraditions   have  taken  place   in  at   least  fourteen   states  where  desertion 
ranks  as  a  misdemeanor,  Illinois  among  them ;  and  that  "in  New  Jersey,  where  deser- 
tion is  a  misdemeanor,  there  is  a  higher  proportion  of  extraditions  in  proportion  to  the 
population  than  in  any  jurisdiction  in  which  the  offense  is  a  felony." 

2.  Editorial,   Journal   of   Criminal   Law   and   Criminology,   November,    1912. 

3.  E.  T.  Devine,  Principles  of  Relief,  Part  III,  Chap.  ii.     New  York  City,  however, 
permits  public  outdoor  relief  to  be  given  to  the  blind,  and  free  distribution  of  coal  in 
winter. 

4.  The  Illinois'  parents  pension  law,  effective  July  1,   1911,  as  amended  June  30, 
1913,  and  July  1,  1915,  formerly  applied  to  deserted  mothers  as  well  as  to  widows  and 
women   whose   husbands   are   incapacitated ;    as   amended    it    excludes   deserted    women 
whose  husbands  have  been  gone  less  than  seven  years,  after  which  time  they  may  be 
legally  regarded  as  dead. 


TREATMENT  OF  DESERTION.  61 

caring  for  deserted  families  literally  thrust  upon  them,  and  so  are  confronted 
with  the  need  of  working  out  a  definite  policy  of  treatment.  How  the  difficulty 
of  the  task  may  be  increased  by  inadequate  laws  or  by  failure  of  the  courts  and 
public  officials  to  cooperate  has  already  been  pointed  out. 

(a)     ALL  DESERTED  WIVES  AIDED  WITHOUT  DISCRIMINATION. 

Many  of  the  charities  through  lack  of  funds,  lack  of  time,  lack  of  sufficient 
office  force,  sometimes  through  lack  of  sufficient  interest,  have  no  definite 
desertion  policy,  a  fact  which  some  of  them  frankly  admit.  Burdened  as  they 
are  with  more  work  than  they  are  able  to  do  they  find  it  impossible  to  work 
one  out;  nor  are  they  equipped  for  carrying  out  other  than  the  most  simple 
plans  should  a  policy  be  clearly  outlined.  All  cases  are  taken  as  they  come, 
relief  being  granted  upon  the  basis  of  the  needs  of  the  applicant,  with  no 
difference  in  treatment  because  of  different  social  status  of  the  applicants. 
The  majority  of  them,  it  would  appear,  do  not  even  make  provision  for 
recording  deserted  wives  as  a  separate  class  of  applicants,1  and  certainly 
any  method  of  treatment  to  be  of  value  must  first  of  all  isolate  its  problem. 
Other  societies  which  report  having  policies  of  dealing  with  deserted  families 
state  candidly  that  these  policies  exist  only  on  paper  for  the  most  part,  and 
that  they  find  it  difficult  to  carry  out  a  thorough-going  plan  for  dealing  with 
desertion. 

In  brief,  the  working  "policy"  of  such  societies  is  to  treat  all  deserted 
women  as  widows,  dependent  because  of  being  deprived  of  male  support  and 
meriting  charity  without  question  because  of  the  misfortune.  It  fails  to  dis- 
tinguish the  woman  whose  husband  may  be  living  from  the  woman  whose 
husband  is  dead. 

The  New  Haven  Organized  Charity  Association  writes: 

"Our  society  handles  deserted  wives  in  about  the  same  way  it  handles 
widows.  The  money  set  aside  for  these  cases  is  given  to  a  visitor  who 
distributes  it  as  need  arises  and  at  the  same  time  tries  to  find  work  for 
the  women."  - 

The  Portland    (Maine)   Associated  Charities  writes: 

"Our  organization  has,  during,  the  past  year,  raised  a  special  fund  to 
be  used  in  pensioning  widows  and  deserted  wives  and  young  children,  and 
the  pension  has  been  given  to  about  the  same  number  of  both  classes  of 
dependents.  We  have  endeavored  to  treat  each  case  on  its  merits  and  I 
fear  we  have  not  arrived  at  a  distinct  policy  with  regard  to  relief  in 
desertion  cases."  = 

The  St.  Louis  Provident  Association  writes: 

"We  keep  no  separate  account  of  expenditure  for  deserted  wives  and 
have  no  special  method  for  dealing  with  them.  They  are  in  the  same  class 
with  widows."  * 

Such  a  policy  as  this  exposes  the  society  to  a  host  of  impositions.  A 
man  may  be  tempted  to  desert  in  times  of  stress  (who  otherwise  would  not), 
if  he  knows  his  family  will  be  cared  for.  It  may  seem  easier  to  provide  for 
his  family  by  disappearing  till  the  emergency  is  relieved  by  others  than  to 
remain  and  meet  it  face  to  face.  If  a  society  gets  a  reputation  for  caring  for 
all  who  come,  without  concern  for  the  husband  other  than  to  establish  the 
fact  that  he  is  not  living  with  his  family,  it  may  unwittingly  serve  to  popu- 
larize both  spurious  and  bona  fide  desertions  in  that  community. 

Again,  such  a  policy  does  nothing  toward  drawing  husband  and  wife 
together  nor  toward  re-establishing  normal  domestic  relations,  when  the  society 


1.  Vide,  p.   23. 

2.  Letter,    February    27,    1915. 

3.  Letter,    March   1,    1915. 

4.  Letter,  February  26,  1915. 


62  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

might  be  able  to  serve  as  an  effective  go-between,  a  peace-maker,  an  arbiter 
of  domestic  differences.  As  the  courts  of  domestic  relations  repeatedly  demon- 
strate, an  intermediary  is  sometimes  all  that  is  required  to  make  reconciliation 
possible.  A  plain  duty  is  neglected  if  no  attempt  is  made  to  serve  in  this 
capacity.  Relief  too  easily  given  may  only  keep  husband  and  wife  apart  by 
making  their  need  of  each  other  less. 

(b)  AID  REFUSED  TO  ALL  DESERTED  WIVES. 

At  the  other  end  of  the  scale  may  be  found  certain  societies  which  refuse 
to  grant  aid  to  any  deserted  family  which  may  apply.  This  is  the  plan  advo- 
cated by  Dr.  Boris  D.  Bogen,  and  followed  by  the  United  Jewish  Charities  of 
Cincinnati.  This  society,  without  rendering  any  relief  at  all,  simply  refers 
deserted  women  to  some  organization  which  can  advise  as  to  the  legal  phases 
of  the  matter  and  so,  apparently,  washes  its  hands  of  responsibility  for  them 
altogether.1  This  very  effectually  checks  any  tendency  to  use  desertion  as 
an  excuse  to  "sponge"  on  the  organization,  and  it  may  discourage  some  men 
from  deserting,  particularly  those  of  the  "spurious"  and  the  "intermittent 
husband"  types.  The  objection  to  this  policy  is  that  it  does  not  have  any 
effect  in  bringing  back  to  the  family  the  deserter  who  has  left  home  with  the 
intention  of  making  his  desertion  permanent;  and  it  leaves  unassisted  cases 
of  genuine  suffering. 

Between  the  two  extremes  indicated  a  variety  of  policies  may  be  denned: 

(c)  BREAKING  UP  THE  HOME. 

Some  societies  maintain  that  only  indoor  relief  should  be  given  deserted 
families;  that  the  husband  by  going  away  has  forfeited  all  right  to  have  his 
home  kept  together,  and  that  if  its  members  cannot  keep  it  together  un- 
assisted they  must  be  provided  for  in  other  ways  than  by  outdoor  relief.  It 
is  also  held  that  a  policy  of  breaking  up  the  home  will  discourage  desertion; 
that  the  husband  will  be  less  ready  to  go  away  on  trivial  or  no  provocation 
if  he  knows  that  he  will  have  no  home  to  which  he  can  return. 

The    Minneapolis    Associated    Charities    writes: 

"Theoretically  the  policy  of  the  society  regarding  deserted  wives  is 
that  the  wife  shall  place  such  children  as  she  cannot  support  unaided  in 
an  institution,  and  she  herself  shall  keep  with  her  one,  two  or  more  chil- 
dren, but  only  so  many  as  her  own  efforts  can  maintain.  Then  if  the  hus- 
band returns  it  is  distinctly  his  responsibility  to  re-establish  the  home 
which  he  has  broken  up  by  his  desertion.  Wherever  this  method  has  been 
tried,  which  has  not  been  often,  it  has  resulted  usually  in  the  return  of 
the  man.  The  objections  to  the  plan  are  *  *  *  the  immediate  hard- 
ships it  puts  upon  the  woman  and  children.  Although  in  the  long  range 
those  hardships  are  much  less,  if  it  succeeds  in  bringing  back  the  hus- 
band, than  in  the  continual  anxieties  of  fast  and  loose  method  of  periodic 
desertion."  This  plan,  however,  is  modified  by  practical  considerations  of 
each  case.2 

The  Cook  County  Juvenile  Court,  and  those  of  several  large  cities,  agree 
to  care  for  dependent  children  in  institutions  in  case  the  deserted  mothers 
cannot  maintain  them  alone.  This  is  a  modification  of  this  particular  form  of 
treatment. 

(d)  RELIEF  GRANTED  ONLY  ON  CONDITION  THAT  THE  WIFE  SHALL  AGREE  TO 
PROSECUTE  HER  HUSBAND. 

Because  the  wife  is  the  person  principally  aggrieved  and  is  also  the  most 
competent  witness  for  the  prosecution,  the  policy  has  been  adopted  by  some 
societies  of  refusing  to  grant  aid  to  a  deserted  woman  unless  she  shall  agree 
to  take  out  a  warrant  and  institute  legal  proceedings  against  her  husband. 

The  Providence  Society  for  Organizing  Charity  writes: 

"Our  society  insists  in  cases  of  desertion  that  before  relief  is  given 

1.  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference  of  Jewish  Charities,  1910,  pp.  57  ;   103. 

2.  Letter,    February   26,    1915. 


TREATMENT  OF  DESERTION.  63 

other  than  emergency  aid  the  deserted  wife  should  enter  a  complaint  with 
the  police."  l 

The  New  Orleans  Charity  Organization  Society  writes: 

"While  we  may  give  temporary  material  aid  until  the  case  can  be 
thoroughly  investigated,  we  always  insist  on  the  deserted  wife  taking  her 
case  to  the  Juvenile  Court  and  if  she  refuses  to  do  this  we  drop  the  case 
until  she  does."  - 

The  Federated  Jewish  Charities  of  Boston  writes: 

"Wife  must  file  application  with  the  National  Desertion  Bureau  and 
take  out  a  court  warrant  for  arrest  of  deserter."  3 

The  Federation  of  Jewish  Charities  of  Louisville  writes: 

"When  a  deserted  woman  comes  for  aid  we  insist  on  her  signing  a 
warrant  for  the  arrest  of  her  husband  should  we  be  able  to  find  him,  and 
if  the  woman  refuses  to  do  so  we  do  not  extend  aid."4 

In  many  cases  such  a  policy,  rigidly  carried  out,  would  work  an  injustice 
upon  his  wife.  If  her  affections  for  her  husband  are  still  enduring  it  will  be 
painful  in  the  extreme  to  take  action  against  him,  however  much  he  may 
deserve  it.  If  he  is  of  a  resentful  or  unkind  nature  such  an  aggressive  move- 
ment on  her  part  may  stir  him  to  hatred  and  cruel  and  abusive  treatment 
of  her  by  way  of  retaliation;  she  may  be  afraid  to  comply. 

When  efforts  at^ersuading  the  man  to  return  have  been  of  no  avail  a 
society  may  fairly  require  as  a  condition  of  giving  assistance  that  the  wife 
give  her  consent  for  some  one  else  to  take  out  the  warrant  in  case  it  does  not 
seem  expedient  that  she  herself  shall  do  so.  Such  a  requirement  would  effec- 
tively check  demands  for  aid  from  spurious  cases,  for  the  wife  would  not  be 
willing  to  take  out  a  warrant  for  a  husband  who  had  not  really  left  her.  It 
would  also  s.erve  to  discourage  men  from  deserting  who  do  so  in  order  to  give 
their  families  a  better  excuse  for  appealing  to  charity.  After  it  becomes  ap- 
parent that  nothing  less,  than  legal  action  can  be  counted  upon  to  secure  the 
man's  return,  the  society  is  accessory  to  his  delinquency  if  it  continues  to  aid 
the  wife  without  obtaining  her  consent  for  a  warrant  to  be  secured.  It  is  a 
co-partner  with  the  wife  in  shielding  him  from  the  law,  and  is  to  that  extent 
a  contributor  to  his  guilt. 


1.  Letter,  March    23,    1915. 

2.  Letter,  February    27,    1915. 

3.  Letter,  July  14,   1915. 

4.  Letter,  May    28,    1915. 


CHAPTER  VII 

Summary  and  Conclusion 

Whatever  else  may  have  been  conveyed  by  the  foregoing  pages  it  is  hoped 
that  two  facts  have  been  made  clear:  first,  that  family  desertion  is  a  problem 
of  our  society  of  sufficient  importance  to  warrant  the  most  serious  considera- 
tion; second,  that  the  consideration  which  it  has  received  in  the  past  has  not 
been  commensurate  with  that  importance. 

At  least  one-tenth  of  the  poverty  which  compels  the  attention  of  organized 
charity  is  traceable  directly  to  this  cause.  No  measure  is  available  of  its 
cost  in  terms  of  broken  homes,  disintegrated  family  life,  loss  of  character, 
and  deficient  development  of  children.  That  desertion  has  come  to  our  at- 
tention so  tardily  is  due  to  the  fact  that  recognition  of  the  home  as  an  institu- 
tion has  been  belated.  That  it  is  being 'studied  now  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
it  has  come  to  impose  a  heavy  economic  burden  upon  the  relief  agencies  of 
the  country  which  is  in  great  measure  preventable,  one  which  they  cannot  con- 
tinue to  bear  without  protest. 

Desertion  seems  to  grow  out  of  human  nature  and  the  family  situation 
itself,  for  it  is  apparently  common  to  all  mankind.  It  is  found  in  all  parts 
of  the  world,  and  has  been  known  in  all  periods  of  history.  No  religion  nor 
race  is  exempt  from  it.  But  that  it  flourishes  in  environments  which  espe- 
cially make  for  instability  of  the  family  is  undoubtedly  true.  Conditions 
particularly  favorable  to  domestic  disturbance  are  found  in  cities:  the  restraint 
of  the  mores  is  less  there,  because  of  the  absence  of  primary  group  attach- 
ments; the  size  and  mobility  of  the  population  makes  for  anonymity  of  the 
individual,  who  finds  in  the  fact  a  greater  freedom  to  do  as  he  pleases;  in 
the  city  the  economic  basis  of  family  unity  tends  to  disappear  and  life  becomes 
intensely  individualistic;  and  a  general  spirit  of  restlessness  and  discontent 
is  prevalent.  Family  disintegration  on  an  extensive  'scale  is  the  result,  and 
among  the  poorer  classes  especially  this  disintegration  takes  the  form  of 
desertion  of  families.  In  this  the  man  is  more  commonly  the  offender,  since 
tradition  and  children  bind  the  wife  to  the  home. 

Society's  interest  is  more  direct  in  cases  where  the  man  deserts,  since 
non-support  is  usually  an  accompaniment  and  the  community  must  assume 
the  burden  of  his  dependents. 

Measures  for  dealing  with  desertion  are  still  in  the  experimental  stage. 
Even  yet  comparatively  few  communities  have  worked  out  a  thorough-going 
policy  of  treatment.  For  those  which  have  not  done  so  a  policy  is  suggested: 

A    SUGGESTED    POLICY    OF    TREATMENT. 

i.     A  Record  of  Desertion  Cases. 

The  first  step  for  every  agency  to  which  desertion  cases  come  is  to 
make  provision  for  recording  deserted  wives  as  a  distinct  class  of  applicants. 
The  extent  of  the  problem  cannot  be  known  otherwise,  nor  can  proper  treatment 
be  applied. 

The  peculiar  character  of  deserter  makes  it  important  to  have  a  knowledge 
of  other  matters  than  those  needful  for  the  files  in  usual  cases  of  destitution. 
The  ordinary  record  blanks  of  the  relief  society  are  not  suitable  for  recording 
this  additional  information.  It  is  suggested  that  a  special  schedule  be  prepared 
for  use  in  desertion  cases  in  addition  to  the  regular  forms,  upon  which  infor- 
mation pertaining  particularly  to  the  desertion  can  be  tabulated.  Some  of  the 
items  especially  valuable  to  record  would  be:  date  of  present  desertion;  date 
and  length  of  previous  desertions;  circumstances  under  which  desertions  oc- 
curred; circumstances  under  which  the  deserter  returned  each  time  previ- 
ously; how  the  deserter  spent  the  interval  of  absence;  how  the  family  main- 


SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSION.  65 

tained  itself  during  those  intervals,  etc.  Such  records,  if  carefully  prepared 
would  constitute  a  helpful  collection  of  material  for  the  office  to  use  in  deal- 
ing with  future  cases,  and  a  valuable  body  of  information  for  further  study 
and  analysis  of  the  problem. 

ii.     The  Training  of  a  Desertion  Specialist. 

It  would  be  well  for  every  relief  agency  which  handles  desertion  cases  to 
turn  all  such  cases  in  to  the  same  investigator  so  far  as  possible.  If  the 
amount  of  work  from  this  particular  type  of  dependency  is  sufficient  to  justify 
it  one  of  the  regular  staff  could  be  detailed  as  the  desertiont  official  for  the  office. 
The  experience  gained  through  repeated  handling  of  cases  of  this  character, 
and  the  continual  concentration  of  thought  upon  them  by  the  same  person, 
would  increasingly  qualify  him  for  this  type  of  work  and  make  him  better 
able  to  deal  with  the  question  discriminatingly  and  effectively.  In  this  way 
the  agency  would,  without  adding  to  the  expenses  of  administration,  develop 
an  authority  upon  the  subject,  a  "desertion  specialist"  of  its  own.1 

iii.     Separation   of   Spurious  from    Genuine   Cases. 

Is  the  case  a  bona  fide  desertion?  This  should  be  determined  first  of 
all.  For  its  own  protection  the  relief  agency  must  be  severely  critical  in  cases 
of  this  sort.  The  desertion  specialist  of  the  office  is  the  one  to  conduct  all 
investigation;  his  experience  and  training  will  make  him  more  able  than 
anyone  else  to  determine  the  authenticity  of  the  claim. 

iv.     Efforts  to  Locate  the  Man. 

If  this  is  the  man's  first  desertion,  or  if  the  situation  in  general  seems 
to  indicate  a  likelihood  of  reconciliation  it  is  preferable  that  the  organization 
undertake  to  locate  him  first  rather  than  immediately  to  turn  the  case  over  to 
the  authorities.  This  does  not  mean  that  private  societies  should  seek  to  take 
the  place  of  the  police.  Whenever  they  undertake  to  locate  men  who  have  de- 
serted it  should  be  clearly  understood  that  they  are  doing  so  gratuitously  and 
simply  because  it  seems  in  that  particular  case  that  reconciliation  is  more  likely 
to  be  effected  by  a  private  agency  than  by  the  police.  Naturally  the  society 
can  ill  afford  to  add  detective  work  to  its  other  pressing  duties;  and  it  should 
not  seek  to  relieve  the  police  department  of  its  proper  responsibility. 

When  the  deserter  is  found  the  society  should  employ  all  its  powers  of 
kindly  persuasion  to  heal  domestic  differences  and  to  effect  reconciliation,  pro- 
vided, in  view  of  all  the  circumstances,  reconciliation  rather  than  divorce  seems 
more  desirable,  as  ordinarily  the  great  objective  of  the  treatment  of  desertion 
is  to  re-establish  the  home.  The  deserter  may  be  more  kindly  disposed  toward 
his  family  and  responsive  to  counsel  if  he  is  approached  at  first  in  a  sympathetic 
and  friendly  way,  rather  than  with  threat  of  arrest  and  prosecution. 

If,  for  any  reason,  reconciliation  between  the  deserter  and  his  family  is 
impossible  or  inadvisable— and  sometimes  that  is  the  case — he  may  still  be 
persuaded  to  contribute  to  its  support  without  the  law  being  invoked  to  compel 
him  to  do  so.a 

v.     "Interim  Relief." 

While  efforts  to  locate  the  husband  are  going  forward  in  the  society  tem- 
porary relief  may  be  given  the  wife  until  the  possibility  of  the  husband's  return 
shall  be  determined.  This,  it  has  been  suggested,  should  be  more  sparingly 
given  during  the  interim  than  in  the  case  of  widows,  in  the  hope  that  when 
the  condition  of  his  family  becomes  known  to  the  husband  it  may  induce  him 
to  return  with  less  delay. 


1.  A  plan  similar  to  this  was  instituted  in  1914  by  the  New  York  Association  for 
Improving  the   Condition   of   the   Poor.      Vide,    The   Survey,   December   19,    1914    (Edi- 
torial). 

2.  This,   as  Dr.   Thomas  J.   Riley  of  the   Brooklyn   Bureau  of  Charities   remarks, 
may  be  effective  for  short  periods  of  time,  but  is  not  likely  to  prove  successful  in  the 
long  run  because  the  local  organization  has  no  legal  hold  on  the  man. 


66  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

> 

It  is  desirable  that  the  status  of  the  family  with  reference  to  the  deserter 
be  determined  quickly  and  to  that  end  the  organization  should  work  with  what 
despatch  it  may  in  the  effort  to  locate  the  man,  so  that  the  interim  may  be  no 
longer  than  need  be. 

This  "interim  relief"  is  for  the  sole  purpose  of  maintaining  the  family  until 
the  progress  of  events  may  determine  a  permanent  policy;  but  even  this  should 
be  granted  the  wife  solely  on  the  condition  that  she  shall  consent  to  the 
issuance  of  a  warrant  for  his  arrest  in  case  it  is  found  impossible  to  secure 
his  acknowledgment  of  the  domestic  obligation  in  any  other  way  than  by 
prosecution.  This  does  not  mean  necessarily  that  the  law  will  be  invoked,  but 
that  she  is  willing  that  it  shall  be  when  every  other  means  fails.1 

vi.     Legal  Proceedings  Against  the  Man  as  a  Last  Resort. 

If  the  efforts  of  the  society  to  locate  the  man  are  of  no  avail,  or  if  when 
found  he  cannot  be  persuaded  to  return,  or  if  the  character  of  the  man  is  such 
that  he  cannot  be  depended  upon  to  keep  any  agreement  he  may  make  as  to 
caring  for  his  family,  his  case  should  be  turned  over  to  the  courts,  there 
to  be  dealt  with  in  a  more  compelling  way.2 

At  this  point  it  is  of  vital  importance  that  the  co-operation  between  public 
and  private  agencies  shall  be  complete.  It  is  extremely  discouraging  to  the 
charities  to  push  a  case  this  far  only  to  have  an  effectual  solution  fail  to 
develop  through  inadequacy  or  indifference  of  the  courts,  the  law,  or  their 
administrators. 

Warrants  should  be  issued  as  freely  for  deserters  as  for  other  criminals, 
and  not  be  withheld  because  a  man's  address  is  unknown. 

vii.     Establishment  of  a  Municipal    Desertion   Bureau. 

The  local  machinery  for  locating,  apprehending  and  returning  deserters 
to  jurisdiction,  as  it  is  at  present  operated,  is  highly  defective.  In  communities 
where  desertion  is  of  an  extent  to  justify  it  a  Desertion  Bureau,  with  full  legal 
powers,  should  be  established  as  an  adjunct  of  the  court,  with  an  expert  in 
charge  and  an  adequate  staff  of  carefully  selected  competent  workers,  for 
the  purpose  of  doing  this  work  effectively.  A  bureau  is  particularly  de- 
sirable where  courts  of  domestic  relations  are  already  established.  Their 
reinforcement  of  each  other  would  increase  the  effectiveness  of  both.  The 
Jewish  National  Desertion  Bureau  affords  a  working  model  as  well  as  an  in- 
spiration for  the  activities  of  such  a  municipal  bureau.  This  department 
should  be  financed  from  public  funds,  with  ample  appropriation  made  for 
returning  men  who  have  fled  to  distant  points  and  for  carrying  on  all  other 
work  essential  to  its  success.  In  the  long  run  a  generous  appropriation  for 
such  a  department  would  be  justified  as  a  public  economy.  The  records  of  the 
Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  and  of  the  National  Desertion  Bureau  are 
sufficient  evidence  upon  this  point. 

viii.     The  Deserted  Wife  Who  is  Virtually  a  Widow. 

On  the  books  of  practically  all  charitable  societies  there  are  cases  of 
deserted  women  who  are  virtually  widows.  The  desertion  has  taken  place  years 
ago  and  all  hope  of  the  husband's  return  has  long  since  been  abandoned. 
These  are  the  "vanished  husbands"  whom  it  seems  likely  no  effort  will  locate. 
For  these  cases,  as  Miss  Zilpha  D.  Smith  suggested  in  1901,  there  seems  no  rea- 
son why  treatment  should  differ  from  that  accorded  widows.  Treatment  of 
them  must  be  in  accord  with  the  needs  of  the  individual  case,  relief  being 
given  in  the  form  of  a  mother's  pension,  institutional  care,  or  regular  outdoor 
relief,  whichever  the  situation  warrants. 


1.  The  question  of  who  shall  sign  the  warrant  has  already  been  discussed.      (Vide, 
pp.  52,  53.)     If  it  is  taken  out  by  the  relief  society  or  its  agent,  and  there  is  danger  that 
the  wife  shall  not  keep  her  agreement  to   testify  to  her  husband's  delinquency  should 
it  become  necessary,   the  society  may   secure   from  her  beforehand  an   affidavit  to   his 
neglect   or   abuse,    or  a  written   agreement    to   appear   against   him.      This   would    prob- 
ably not  be  acceptable  as  testimony  in  court,  as  over  against  her  refusal  to  testify,  but 
it  would  at  least  serve  to  put  her  in  a  position  where  she  could  less  gracefully  refuse 
to  testify. 

2.  The  policy  to  be  followed  has  already  been  discussed  in  chap.  vi. 


SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSION.  67 

A  far  deeper  question  than  that  of  the  treatment  of  desertion  is  that  of  its 
tition.  The  social  objective  must  be  not  merely  one  of  rehabilitation  of 
families  which  have  been  broken  up,  but  the  larger  one  of  saving  them  from 
disintegration  before  it  actually  sets  in.  Except  insofar  as  it  may  discourage 
other  desertions  any  treatment  of  those  which  have  already  taken  place  is  of 
necessity  chiefly  palliative;  it  leaves  the  roots  of  the  infection  still  within  the 
social  system. 

The  family  today,  as  never  before,  is  being  subjected  to  influences  which 
are  modifying  it  in  vital  ways.  As  a  living  organism  it  must  change  in  order 
to  adapt  itself  to  the  demands  of  the  day  and  generation.  Unfortunately  various 
elements  are  entering  into  its  readjustment  which  are  causing  it  to  fall  as  an 
object  of  esteem  as  an  institution  in  the  eyes  of  many  persons.  Because  they 
hold  it  of  such  low  value  they  treat  its  obligations  lightly,  and  lay  them  aside 
almost  at  will.  The  problem,  then,  is  one  of  raising  the  value  of  family  and 
home  in  the  estimation  of  those  who  have  taken  upon  themselves  the  responsi- 
bilities which  they  involve.  It  is  not  enough  to  try  to  arouse  in  men  a  sense  of 
duty  which  will  hold  them  to  homes  which  they  would  prefer  to  leave.  It  is 
not  enough  to  perfect  machinery  which  will  compel  men  to  shoulder  domestic 
responsibilities  which  they  wish  to  evade.  Those  things  are  important,  but 
they  are  not  solutions.  The  big  undertaking  is  to  implant  in  men  and  women 
a  new  scale  of  social  values  in  which  the  home  shall  have  first  place. 

Such  an  undertaking  involves  education,  character  building,  the  inculcation 
of  high  ideals  of  home  life  and  of  family  importance  in  the  individual.  It  also 
involves,  in  most  cases,  a  raising  of  family  standards  and  improvement  of 
home  conditions  which  surround  the  individual;  and  this  in  turn  many  times 
involves  an  improvement  of  economic  conditions  which  shall  make  such  improve- 
ment possible.  If  men  and  women  are  to  regard  the  home  as  worth  while  it  must 
be  made  worth  while.  We  must  not  suppose  that  domestic  unrest  and  this 
lowering  of  domestic  values  can  be  isolated  and  considered  in  their  individual 
aspects  alone.  They  are  but  symptoms  of  a  deep-lying  and  fundamental  disor- 
ganization which  must  be  readjusted  before  they  will  disappear. 

A  community,  therefore,  must  not  depend  upon  its  legal  and  charitable 
agencies,  however  efficient  they  may  be,  for  a  solution  of  its  desertion  problem. 
It  must  go  behind  the  concrete  outcroppings  with  which  these  specialized 
agencies  deal,  to  the  lives  and  homes  of  the  people  who  compose  it.  Definite 
programs  must  be  thoughtfully  worked  out,  having  as  their  objective  the  con- 
servation of  the  home.  It  is  not  intended  at  this  point  to  suggest  such  programs 
in  detail.  Doubtless  the  most  important  point  of  concentration  is  found  in  the 
youth  of  today  who  are  to  be  tomorrow's  home  makers.  Boys  and  girls  should 
have  brought  to  them  systematically  the  implications  of  the  family.  Sex  edu- 
cation should  receive  greater  attention;  the  duties  as  well  as  the  privileges  of 
wedlock  should  be  borne  in  upon  them,  and  the  sacredness  of  parenthood. 
School  and  church  should  conspire  to  eliminate  any  idea  of  marriage  as  a  light 
or  trivial  thing.  All  forces  at  our  disposal  should  be  brought  to  bear  to  make 
them  feel  the  supreme  importance  of  the  home  in  our  social  and  moral  life. 

To  this  great  task  of  social  prophylaxis  our  urban  communities,  especial!}', 
must  soon  seriously  address  themselves.  Any  attempt  to  deal  with  desertion  or 
any  other  phase  of  family  disintegration  which  does  not  take  into  considera- 
tion the  conditions  which  give  it  rise,  is  superficial  and  foredoomed  to  failure. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

I.     VARIOUS   CONFERENCE    PROCEEDINGS. 

1 — National  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction. 

1902.  "What  Part  Shauld  Relief  Play  in  Treatment  of  Families  Whose 
Distress  is  Due  Mainly  to  the  Husband's  Fault  or  Defect?" 

1905.  "Desertion  and  Extradition."    A  letter  from  Wm.  H.  Baldwin  to  the 
Conference. 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  and  Resolutions  on  Desertion 
and  Extradition. 

1911.  Wm.   H.   Baldwin,   "The   Present   Status   of   Family   Desertion   and 
Non-Support  Laws." 

J.  C.  Logan,  "A  Social  Policy  for  Dealing  with  the  Recreant  Husband 
and  Father." 

1912.  H.  E.  Varga,   "Desertion  of  Wives  and  Children  by  Emigrants  to 
America." 

2 — Canadian  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correction. 

1911.  George  Kennedy,  "Family  Desertion." 

1912.  Rufus  Smith,  "Desertion  and  Non-Support." 

3 — National  Conference  of  Catholic  Charities. 

1912.     Patrick  Mallon,  "Desertion  and  Non-Support." 

4 — National  Conference  of  Jewish  Charities. 

1900.     Nathan  Bijur:    Report  of  Committee  on  Desertions. 

1906.  L.  K.  Frankel:    Report  of  Committee  on  Desertions. 

1910.  Morris  D.  Waldman,  "Family  Desertion." 

1912.     Morris  D.  Waldman:    Report  of  Committee  on  Desertions. 

5 — Various  State  Conferences. 
Florida: 

1914.     Marcus  C.  Fagg,  "How  to  Deal  With  Wife  Deserters  and  Recreant 
Husbands." 

Indiana: 

1911.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

1912.  C.  C.  North,  "Vagrancy  and  Family  Desertion." 

Iowa: 

1906.     Clare  Lunbeck,  "Does  Iowa  Need  a  Law  to  Punish  Family  Deser- 
tion?" 

Maryland: 

1911.     James   T.    O'Neill,   "Non-Support   and   Family   Desertion." 
William  DeLacy,  "Operation  of  the  Law  in  Washington,  D.  C." 

Massachusetts:      (Proceedings  not  published.) 

1903.  Max  Mitchell,  "Deserted  Wives." 

W.  H.  Hardy,  "Non-Supporting  Husbands  at  Home." 

1910.     C.  C.   Carstens,  "A  Study  of  the  Enforcement  of  the  Non-Support 
Law  in  Massachusetts." 

Missouri: 

1913.  Oscar  Leonard,  "Family  Desertion." 


70  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

New   Hampshire: 

1912.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

1913.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

New  Jersey: 

1909.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

New  York: 

1910.  Mary  Breed,  "Difference  of  Treatment  of  Widows  and  of  Deserted 
Wives." 

Pennsylvania: 

1910.     Bonsall  and  Sharp,  "Desertion  and  Non-Support." 

1912.  Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-Support  Laws  in  Penn- 
sylvania." 

Rhode    Island: 

1913.  Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "The  Broadening  Question  of  Non-Support." 

Texas: 

1912.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

1914.  Family  Desertion.     Discussion. 

II.     CITY  ORGANIZATIONS. 
Boston: 

1901.  Zilpha  D.  Smith,  "Deserted  Wives  and  Deserting  Husbands:  a  study 
of  234  families  based  on  the  experience  of  the  district  committees  and 
agents  of  the  Associated  Charities  of  Boston."  Publication  No.  75  of 
the  Associated  Charities. 

1910.  "A  Study  of  Non-Supporting  Husbands."     Thirty-first  Annual  Report, 
Publication  No.  89  of  the  Associated  Charities. 

New  York  City: 

1911.  Mrs.  William  Einstein,  "Keeping  Together  of  Families." 

Philadelphia: 

1903.  "Wife  Desertion."    Report  of  a  special  committee  of  the  Philadelphia 
Society  for  Organizing  Charity. 

1913.  Family  Desertion.     Vol.  VI,   No.   11,   Bulletin   of  the   City   Club   of 
Philadelphia,  February  12,  1913,  contains  the  following: 

Mrs.  Louis  C.  Madeira,  "What  Family  Desertion  Costs  the  Community  in 

Dependent  Children,  Family  Poverty,  and  Dollars." 

Michael  Francis  Doyle,  "Causes  of  Family  Desertion." 

Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "The  Movement  to  Prevent  Family  Desertion." 

Max  Herzberg,  "How  the  Jewish  Charities  Are  Dealing  With  the  Prob- 
lem." 

Eugene  C.  Bonniwell,  "Proposed  Legislation  in  Pennsylvania." 

Pittsburgh: 

1910.     Ward   Bonsall:     Report   on   Desertion   and    Non-Support   Laws. 

Washington: 

1904.  Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-Support  Laws:  a  study 
of  the  laws  of  the  various  states  made  in  connection  with  the  Associated 
Charities  of  Washington,  D.  C."     (Published  in  the  volume  with  Miss 
Lillian  Brandt's  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four  Deserters  and   Their 
Families.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY.  71 

III.  NATIONAL  DESERTION   BUREAU. 

1912.  Monroe  M.  Goldstein:  Report  of  the  852  cases  of  family  desertion 
treated  by  the  National  Desertion  Bureau  from  its  establishment,  Feb- 
ruary 1,  1911,  to  April  1,  1912. 

1915.  Monroe  M.  Goldstein,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-Support."     Report 
of  the  National  Desertion  Bureau  for  three  years,  1912-1915. 

IV.  SPECIAL  PAPERS  AND  STUDIES. 

1905.  Lilian  Brandt,  Five  Hundred  and  Seventy-four  ^Deserters  and  Their 
Families.  Publication  No.  1  of  the  Committee  on  Social  Research  of  the 
Charity  Organization  Society  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

1909.  James  R.  Motion,  "Desertion  Cases."     Two  pamphlets  published  by 
the    Glasgow,    Scotland,    Parish    Council.     June,    1909:      Memorandum 
and  Report  by  the  Inspector  of  Poor.     October,  1909:      Supplementary 
Memorandum  and  Report  by  the  Inspector  of  Poor. 

1911.  Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Must  a  Man,  Charged  in  Pennsylvania  with  Mis- 
demeanor on  Account  of  Desertion  or  Non-Support  of  His  Wife  or  Chil- 
dren, be  Tried  by  a  Jury?" 

1912.  James  R.  Motion:     Wife  and  Family  Desertion:  Emigration  as  a  Con- 
tributory Cause.     Publication  of  the  Glasgow,  Scotland,  Parish  Council. 

1913.  James   R.   Motion:      Wife  and  Family  Desertion:  An  Inquiry   into 
its  causes.     Publication  of  the  Glasgow,  Scotland,  Parish  Council. 

Charles  N.  Goodnow:     A  Xeic  Laic  Dealing  icith  Wile  and  Child  Aban- 
donment.    Publication  of  the  Illinois  Committee  on  Social  Legislation. 

V.     MAGAZINE  ARTICLES. 

American  Journal  of  Sociology: 

1910,  July— Miss  S.  P.  Breckpnridge,  "Neglected  Widowhood  in  the  Juvenilo 
Court." 

American  Magazine: 

1916,  April — Verne  Dyson,  "She  Brings  Husbands  to  Time." 

Annals  of  the  American  Academy: 

1903,  March — Helen  Foss,  "A  Study  of  Wife  Desertion." 

Charities: 

1903,  May  2— Helen  Foss,  "Genus  Deserter." 
May  9 — "Conference  on  Family  Desertions." 

1905,  April  15 — Special  number  on  "Family   Desertion." 

April  22— F.  E.  Wade,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-Support  Laws." 
August  19 — Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Child  Desertion  and  Extradition  in  New 
York." 

September  9 — "The  National  Conference  and  the  Extradition  of  Deser- 
ters." 

September   16 — "Extradition   for  Desertion  as  a  Misdemeanor  in   New 
York." 

1906,  March  3 — Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-support  Law 
in  Washington." 

March  10 — Wm  H.  Baldwin,  "Interstate  Rules  as  Applied  to  the  Extra- 
dition of  Deserters." 
May  26 — L.  K.  Frankel,  "Family  Desertion  Law." 

1907,  January  19— F.  E.  Wade,  "Practical  Results  of  the  New  Desertion 
Law." 

September  21 — Wm.  DeLacy,  "Non-support  Laws  at  the  Nation's  Capi- 
tal." 


72  A  STUDY  OF  FAMILY  DESERTION. 

1909,  November    20 — Wm.    H.    Baldwin,    "Making    the    Deserter    Pay    the 
Piper." 

Charities  Review: 

1895,  June — "Proper  Treatment  of  Idle  or  Drinking  Men  and  Their  Neglected 
Families." 

1900,  October — Ada  Eliot,  "Deserted  Wives." 

Collier's : 

1911,  August  26 — A.  Spadoni,  "In  the  Domestic  Relations  Court." 

Delineator: 

1912,  September — W.  Hard,  "Fathers  Who  Let  Their  Children  Starve." 

1913,  March,  May — W.  Hard,  "Husbands  Who  Resign." 

Harper's  Weekly: 

1908,  May  30 — V.  Rousseau,  "Court  of  Sorrows." 
August  8 — T.  E.  Harry,  "Repairer  of  Homes." 

How  to  Help: 

1905,  p.  148— M.  Conyngton,  "Care  to  Needy  Families:    Desertion." 

Jewish  Charity: 

1905,  February — Special   number  on   "Family   Desertion." 

1906,  January — Morris  D.  Waldman,  "Family  Desertion." 

Journal  of  Criminal  Law  and  Criminology: 

1912,  September — Wm.  H.  Baldwin,   "Non-support  Laws  and  the   Chicago 
Court  of  Domestic  Relations." 

November — Robert  H.  Gault,  "In  Case  of  Family  Desertion  or  Non-sup- 
port." 

1913,  May — Wm.  H.  Baldwin,  "Family  Desertion  and  Extradition  in  Penn- 
sylvania." 

Lend  a  Hand: 

1896,  February— Mary   E.   Richmond,   "Married   Vagabonds." 

New  Boston: 

1911,  March — Wm.  DeLacy,  "Making  Wife  Desertion  Unpopular:  the  Work- 
ing of  the  non-support  law  in  the  District  of  Columbia." 
C.  C.  Carstens,  "Bringing  the  Wife  Deserter  to  Terms." 

Outlook: 

1910,  July  16 — "Conserving  the  Family." 

Survey : 

1910,  February  5 — Wm.  DeLacy,  "Family  Desertion  and  Non-support." 

1911,  July  1— F.  H.   McLean,  "New  Views  on  Desertion." 

1912,  May  11— "Bureau  for  Husband  Finding." 
June  22 — "Family  Desertion  in  Manitoba." 

1913,  April  12 — "The  Family  Deserter  Brought  to  Book." 
June  21 — "Probation  ^for  all  Emigrant  Husbands." 

1914,  December  19 — "The  Deserted." 


BIBLIOGRAPHY;     :;.  °.  ••:.••'  73 


VI.     MISCELLANEOUS. 

1889.  The  United  States  Department  of  Labor,  A  Report  on  Marriage  and 
Divorce  in  the  United  States,  1861-86.  Statistics  of  divorces  granted  on 
grounds  of  desertion.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  Commissioner. 

1904.     E.  T.  Devine,  "Family  Desertion."  Principles  of  Relief,  chap.  xi. 

1909.  The  United   States  Census  Bureau,  A  Special  Report  on  Marriage 
and  Divorce,  1861-1906.     Statistics  of  divorces  granted  on  grounds   of 
desertion;  and  legislation  where  desertion  is  made  grounds  for  divorce 
or  legal  separation.     S.  N.  D.  North,  Director. 

1910.  Frederic  Almy,  Relief:  A  Primer  for  the  Family  Rehabilitation  Work 
of  the  Buffalo  Charity   Organization   Society.     Contains  a  brief  state- 
ment of  policy  of  treatment  of  deserted  wives. 

1912.  E.  T.  Devine,  "Inefficiency  and  Desertion,"   The  Family  and  Social 
icork,"  chap.  vi. 

1913.  Cincinnati  Juvenile  Protective  Association.     A  study  of  the  Deser- 
tion problem  in  Cincinnati.     (Unpublished.) 

1914.  Chicago  Juvenile  Protective  Association.     A  study  of  two  hundred 
cases  from  the  Chicago  Court  of  Domestic  Relations  with  respect  to 
abandonment,  conducted  by  G.  A.  Michell.     (Unpublished.) 

Chicago  Jewish  Aid  Society.     A  study  of  one  hundred  desertion  cases 
aided  by  the  society,  conducted  by  Miss  Ella  Kahn.     (Unpublished.) 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN     INITIAL     FINE     OF     25     CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


OCT 


m 


MAR  29 


REG'D 

NQV    S 


REC'D  LD 

JAN  9    1963 


APR  1  ! 


MAY  1  6  1983 
JUL171982 

JUN26 


DEC  0  5  1999 


LD  lil-oOHi-8,-32 


:RKELEY  LIBRARIES 


C D 0 fi M 


£1.0 


07307 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


